Osama and Al-Qaeda III: The Muslim Brotherhood (1)


“The jihad for the recovery of Jerusalem is a duty for all Muslims …”

- Mohammed Badie, Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood.

“In Egypt, as in Syria, the Muslim Brotherhood has made itself into an appendage of the Western imperialist ruling class.  It has dutifully served these interests over the course of decades, though the names, faces, and propaganda have changed over the years.”

- Eric Draitser, geopolitical analyst

Square_compasses.svgThe above quite by Mohammed Badie in October 2012 came after the turmoil in Egypt and the Arab Spring. This transition period was effectively manufactured in the majority of Arab nations and in the case of Egypt more opportunistic in that a genuine revolution was hijacked. The Muslim Brotherhood came to power via Mohammed Morsi who after promising to respect all international treaties promptly turned his back on them, much to the displeasure of the populace and the military who eventually took control.  This was however, mostly due to the neo-liberal economic polices of the IMF which demands severe austerity measures in order to conform to the correct levels of debt slavery which Morsi promised he would implement. Either way, the Anglo-American Establishment had already infiltrated both the Muslim Brotherhood, the military and some protest movements as par the usual formula for coloured revolutions. With all bases covered the turmoil could play out in any direction and US and their allied interests would remain in control. 

So, who are the Muslim Brotherhood and why had Osama bin Laden been associated with its ideology?

altaqwa_lugano_building1050081722-10002

The offices of Al Taqwa Bank Lugano, Italy, on the borders of Italy and Switzerland. [Source: historycommons.org]

In 2001, a 14-page document entitled: “The Project” was discovered by Swiss investigators in the home of Youssef Nada, the leader of the , shut down in 2002 by US and UN officials for alleged ties to Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and other radical Islamic militant groups. Nada and other Al-Taqwa directors are all members of the Muslim Brotherhood. Nada claimed innocence regarding the document thinking it merely an interesting historical document. “The Project” reveals a strategic plan for “the establishment of the reign of God over the entire world,” and a “… global vision of an international strategy of Islamic policy.” Emphasis on infiltrating local and national centres of power; supporting the Holy War in Palestine; fermenting anti-Semitism; the infiltration of existing entities without “… being located and neutralized” and the establishment of “… a network of religious, educational, and charitable institutions in Europe and the US to increase influence there.” [1]

This could almost be the Arab version of the Protocols of Zion and very possibly drawn from the same ideological source: a hoax for a hoax and the continuance of divide and rule. On the one hand we have a Greater Israel and a political Messianism which demands a Global Jewish Theocracy and on the other, a global Jihad to install a World Islamic Caliphate. All the Establishment has to do is to play them off against each other and divide the spoils from each…

Hassan_al-Banna

Hassan al-Banna the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood (Source: wikipedia commons)

A major Sunni revivalist organisation, the Muslim Brotherhood (al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun) was founded in the Egyptian town of Isma’iliyaa in March 1928 by school teacher, mystic and British Intelligence agent Hassan al-Banna. It was set up due to a number of diverse influences which included the abolition of the caliphate by Turkish reformer Kemal Ataturk, in 1924 and the destructive consequences of the World War I, to the eventual demise of the Ottoman Empire. From only 800 members in 1936, it grew to over 2 million by 1948 with branches in over 70 countries in 2011.

As with so many organisations born from economic hardship, poverty and political strife, its beginnings had an idealistic even altruistic design, being charitable in nature and with an emphasis on moral reform. A devout Muslim and well versed in the Koran, al-Banna founded an organization called the Society for Moral Behaviour and soon after, the Society for Impeding the Forbidden. He was also a member of the Hasafiyya Brothers’ order focused on Sufi mysticism which later led to al-Banna organising his own order, the Hasafiyya Society for Welfare. [2] He later became a freemason, a perfectly normal practice of the upper middle class aristocracy in Egypt of the day. Historian and author Peter Goodman tells us that: “… the Egyptian monarchs, from Khedive Ismail to King Fouad, were made honorary Grand Masters at the start of their reigns. From 1940 to 1957 there were close to seventy Masonic lodges chartered throughout Egypt.” [3] In fact, many important Islamic leaders in Egypt were freemasons such as Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, the founder of the political pan-Islamic Salafiyya movement, and Mohammed Abdou his successor. Sheikh Mohammed Abdou the Grand Mufti of Egypt was also the Masonic Grand Master of the United Lodge of Egypt and used as a conduit to overturn the prohibition of banking so that British banking families could slowly monopolise the country.

Muslim_Brotherhood_Emblem

“Muslim Brotherhood Emblem” (Source: Wikpedia commons)

It was from these interests that al-Banna was in all likelihood recruited by British freemasonic-intelligence agents to help open up the Middle East and the consequent Islamic subversion. Egypt had always been a natural magnet for freemasonry counting it as the major birthplace and historical lineage of modern day lodges. Goodman states: “Freemasonry appeared in Egypt soon after Napoleon’s conquest in 1798 when General Kleber, a French Mason and top commander in Napoleon’s army established the Lodge of Isis. French Masonry dominated Egypt until British lodges began to appear after the British occupation in 1882.” [4]

The Muslim Brotherhood (MB) wished to liberate the Islamic homeland from foreign hands and like the Zionists, establish an Islamic-led theocratic state which would then be extended across the globe. According to al-Banna, the Caliphate had to govern all lands that were at one time under the control of Muslims. He stated:

We want the Islamic flag to be hoisted once again on high, fluttering in the wind, in all those lands that have had the good fortune to harbor Islam for a certain period of time and where the muzzein’s call sounded in the takbirs and the tahlis. Then fate decreed that the light of Islam be extinguished in these lands that returned to unbelief. Thus Andalusia, Sicily, the Balkans, the Italian coast, as well as the islands of the Mediterranean, are all of them Muslim Mediterranean colonies and they must return to the Islamic fold. The Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea must once again become Muslim seas, as they once were. [5]

Looking closer through the magnifying glass of history, the Muslim Brotherhood was part of the British Illuminati branch of freemasonry firmly rooted in Egypt and Turkey care of Bertrand Russell, John Philby and T.E. “Lawrence of Arabia “the most effective British Intelligence agent in the Middle East at the time. Former British Intelligence Officer Dr. John Coleman, was in no doubt that the Muslim Brotherhood was a creation of British intelligence; set up as a secret freemasonic order to “keep the Middle East backward so its natural resource, oil, could continue to be looted.” Indeed, without the Muslim Brotherhood no checking of nationalist movements led by such figures as Nasser, Bhutto and the Shah of Iran who had tried to develop their countries would have been possible. The cover story was to be seen as a reaction to Western Freemasonry’s secular youth corps of “Young Societies.”

Egypt_LodgeSource: http://www.rgle.org.uk/

The Young Egypt movement founded in 1933 by lawyer and freemason Ahmed Hussein stoked the fires of an Islamic “Empire” which is exactly what the British Empire in apparent decline had long sought: a grand “Clash of Civilisations” with Christian and Muslim, Zionist and Islamist, Fascist and Communist, creating eternal divisions that would lead to a global conflagration and an ultimate New World Order. The “Young” Order was to replace the “Old” Order and the subversion of Islamic culture was an integral part of that strategy. As Peter Goodman commented in his long study of the MB, without the long-standing Round Table-sponsored British interference in the region: “… radical Islam would have remained the illegitimate, repressive minority movement that it has always been, and the Middle East would have remained stable and prosperous …” [6]  Geo-politics historian and author Robert Dreyfuss also sees the MB with its beginnings in London: “… as the standard-bearer of an ancient, anti-religious (pagan) heresy that has plagued Islam since the establishment of the Islamic community (umma) by the Prophet Mohammed in the seventh century …” and from which: “… a host of fundamentalist Sufi, Sunni, and radical Shiite brotherhoods and societies flourish.”

From a nexus of freemasonic influences partnered with their geo-political strategists under authority of the Round Table: “The real Muslim Brothers are … the secretive bankers and financiers who stand behind the curtain, the members of the old Arab, Turkish, or Persian families whose genealogy places them in the oligarchic elite, with smooth business and intelligence associations to the European black nobility and, especially, to the British oligarchy.” [7]

The MB embraced all the fascist paranoia of this period of history not least, the thought of the revenge for Zionist atrocities drawn from the ancient past right up to modern history and the British “concessions” of the Balfour agreement. As a natural consequence of persecuting Jews and Judaism, collaboration with German and Italian fascists followed. German military intelligence had already become bedfellows with Hassan al-Banna partly from the support they gave during the Arab revolt in Palestine in 1936 and partly due to fascist-freemasonic influences which shaped al-Banna’s thinking in the first place. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin el-Husseini was to become the intermediary between Nazi ideology and al-Banna’s new Brotherhood. He met with his chum Hitler on several occasions and actively assisted the Axis Powers during World War II in both propaganda and military recruitment. [8]

hitler-y-husseini-2

Grand MuftiAmin al-Husseini meeting with Adolf Hitler, December 1941. (Source: wikipedia commons)

Weaving in amongst a potent mix of tradition and modern politics, al-Banna was able to surf the wave of new visions seeking expression in yet another power vacuum in the Middle East. The MB’s members are “brothers,” operating in groups called “cells”, just as illuminated Freemasonry did and continues to do. The nature of Islam was not hierarchical which lent itself to subterfuge and the later difficulties in eradicating ideological corruption. He used the honeycomb structure of Adam Weishaupt, which journalist and historian Mark Erikson described as featuring: “… sophisticated governance structures, sections in charge of different segments of society (peasants, workers, professionals), units entrusted with key functions (propaganda, press relations, translation, liaison with the Islamic world), and specialised committees for finances and legal affairs – all built on existing social networks, in particular those around mosques and Islamic welfare associations.” [9]

It spread into Egyptian society from the principles adopted by al-Banna who initially at least, following orders directly from the British Establishment. Its success would never have happened without it. Focusing solely on Islam, unlike freemasonry which was multi-faith membership, the MB was strictly for Muslims, cultivating secrecy and pyramidal command overlaid onto a logistical honeycomb structure. As is the case with all occult groups, the objectives of the leaders at the apex of the pyramid were not known to the common neophytes at the lower most tiers. Within such an organisational structure based on occult, religious and political beliefs it was inevitable that ponerisation would be swift, not least because of al-Banna’s warming to the ideology of Nazism.

A para-military wing named the Special Order Group was formed from the fascist “Young Egypt” (Misr al-Fatah) movement, founded in October 1933 and modelled on Mussolini’s black-shirts whose slogan was: “believe, obey, fight” and under the MB was changed to: “action, obedience, silence”, and in keeping with the famous Rosicrucian maxim: “To know, to will, to dare and to keep silent.” An intelligence apparatus took shape and in the tradition of all agencies oversaw the implementation of black operations including, assassinations, terrorist attacks and eventually espionage. [10] It was used in much the same way as the Irgun Israeli terrorist group by carrying out guerrilla raids against British colonial rule of the 1940s until Hassan al-Banna was assassinated in 1949.

It was radical leader, poet, academic and fellow freemason Sayyid Qutb who laid the fascist framework that would be so appealing as a formidable tool for Western intelligence agencies and which would continue to shape Al-Qaeda’s destiny well into the future. Indeed, some historians believe that without Qutb, Al-Qaeda would not have existed. [11] His conversion to radical Islam came about after being exposed to the culture of the United States during graduate studies from 1948-51. This grew to a hatred of all things American which flaunted churches as “entertainment centers and sexual playgrounds.” He joined the MB assuming the position of editor-in-chief of the organization’s newspaper, soon becoming its intellectual figurehead. [12]

Qutb

Sayyid Qutb on trial in 1966 under the Gamal Abdel Nasser regime

Mark Erikson explains Qutb’s principle accomplishment which was:

“… to articulate the social and political practices of the Muslim Brotherhood from the 1930s through the 1950s – including collaboration with fascist regimes and organizations, involvement in anti-colonial, anti-Western and anti-Israeli actions, and the struggle for state power in Egypt – in demagogically persuasive fashion, buttressed by tendentious references to Islamic law and scriptures to deceive the faithful. Qutb, a one-time literary critic, was not a religious fundamentalist, but a Goebbels-style propagandist for a new totalitarianism to stand side-by-side with fascism and communism.” [13]

A powerful echo of lluminist belief is seen in Sayyid Qutb’s writings. Expert on Islamic Studies Dr. David Zeidan sees Qutb’s particular brand of Jihad as explicated in his book Milestones as “reminiscent of the French and Bolshevik revolutions” with Qutb’s thoughts aligned to “fascist and Marxist ideas,” and: “Whilst clothed in Islamic idiom, they actually seem to represent an invasion of Islam by extreme secular modern philosophies.” [14] And this is exactly the same “revolutionary” principle that has been used to divide and conquer and successively seeded in the goodness of an initial idea.

As the Zionists pressed ahead with their designs, by the late 1940s the MB had decided to act against the Egyptian monarchy in true Weishauptian form. With the 1948 Arab-Israeli War taking place in the background, the conflict between the monarchy and the Brotherhood increased leading to Prime Minister Mahmoud al-Nukrashi Pasha disbanding it in December of that year. This led to Pasha’s assassination. Despite his condemnation of the murder Hassan al-Banna was also assassinated by government agents in 1949 paved the way for even more extremist groupings under leader Sayyid Qutb. By the 1960’s MB recruitment drive had netted one Ayman al-Zawahiri, an Egyptian physician would become the ideological right-hand man of Osama bin Laden and the channelling of the more fundamentalist doctrine of Wahhabism that would produce the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and later Al-Qaeda. Another was the Islamic Group of Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman who was also implicated in the 1981 assassination of President Sadat. Both men would go on to work closely with the CIA in fermenting militant Islamism. Osama was said to have been a follower of Qutbism hence the differing methods and focus of the two Al-Qaeda leaders. [15]

The Muslim Brotherhood’s roots lie in British freemasonry, its branches extending through MI5 and the CIA. Thus it has become a de facto arm of Western Intelligence harbouring a variety of unconscious and conscious players. We will see how this was further developed in the next post.

 


Notes

[1] ‘The Project’, unknown author, Le Temps, Geneva, October 6, 2005.
[2] op. cit Weaver.
[3] op. cit. Goodman.
[4] Ibid.
[5] p.19; Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan by Caroline Fourest, Published by Encounter Books, 2008.
[6] ‘The Muslim Brotherhood: The Globalists’ Secret Weapon’ By Peter Goodman, 2002. http://www.redmoonrising.com
[7] op.cit Dreyfuss.
[8] Hasseini personally recruited leading members of the Bosnian-Muslim “Hanjar” (saber) division of the Waffen SS. “He recruited Muslim volunteers for the German armed forces operating in the Balkans. Beginning in 1941, al-Husseini visited Bosnia, and convinced Muslim leaders that a Muslim S.S. division would be in the interest of Islam. In spite of these and other propaganda efforts, “only half of the expected 20,000 to 25,000 Muslims volunteered’The largest division was the 13th Handschar division, which conducted operations against Communist partisans in the Balkans from February 1944. The creation of this division displeased the Croatian government, which raised numerous minor obstacles to its activities, out of fear that it would serve as a basis for Muslim autonomy.” From Wikipedia and Sources: Breitman, Richard; Goda, Norman J. W. (2011). Hitler’s Shadow. | Medoff,, Rafael (1996). “‘The Mufti’s Nazi Years Re-examined”. – The Journal of Israeli History. 17. pp. 317–333.
[9] Islamism, fascism and terrorism (Parts 1- 3) By Marc Erikson By Mark Erikson, Asia Times December 4, 2002.
[10] Rosicrucian reference: Theosophy Vol. 26, No. 7, May, 1938 (pp. 290-296) (Number 22 of a 29-part series) Great Theosophists: The Rosicrucians | Ibid. (Erikson)
[11] p.332; The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11. By Lawrence Wright. Published by Knopf. 2006.| ISBN 0-375-41486-X.
[12] p.78; Islam: A Mosaic, Not a Monolith By Vartan Gregorian. Published by Brookings Institution Press, 2003.
[13] op. cit. Erkison.
[14] Book Review: Milestones by David Zeidan | http://www.angelfire.com/az/rescon/Bkrvqtb.html
[15] After Jihad: American and the Struggle for Islamic Democracy by Noah Feldman. Published by Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2003.

Osama and Al-Qaeda II: The “War on Drugs”


“Drug networks are important factors in the politics of every continent. The United States returns repeatedly to the posture of fighting wars in areas of petroleum reserves with the aid of drug-trafficking allies – drug proxies – with which it has a penchant to become involved.”

- Peter Dale Scott, writer, political analyst

US and NATO presence in Afghanistan had long been viewed as an increasing financial burden notwithstanding the rise in suicides and deaths, with many questioning why it is that the respective armies were even there. (50% more US soldiers committed suicide in Afghanistan in 2012 than were killed in the country). [1] As Islamic militants and various strains of Al-Qaeda rebels are currently fighting alongside US, Israeli and NATO backed forces in Syria, the irony has not been lost on many members of the public who are beginning to see that they’ve been had.

A March 2013 Harvard Kennedy School Faculty Research study by Linda J. Bilmes and Daniel Patrick Moynihan placed the US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in their proper financial perspective by calculating the cost for US taxpayers at $4 trillion to $6 trillion. That is an almost unimaginable number. The so-called war on terror and the fight against Al-Qaeda is slowly losing credibility even amongst the most staunchly nationalistic. Since the US military used 1.8 billion rounds of ammunition a year and imported bullets from Israel, the most militarised country on earth, then we can get some idea of how important this region is. For every rebel killed, it costs around a quarter of a million dollars which means that it could not continue forever – at least not at the same level of expenditure. [2] Controlling the regional drug-trafficking in the country plays a huge role in covert operations as it provides enormous income for black ops away from Congressional oversight. Nonetheless, US/NATO forces were desperate to secure their drug fortunes before pulling out and leaving a skeleton force to watch over them.

opium-fields-15

“An Afghan National Army (ANA) soldier provides security during a satellite patrol along a poppy field in Marjah, Afghanistan, April 17, 2012.” (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. David A. Perez/Released, Source: Public Intelligence )

As we know from early posts in this series, after oil and the arms trade, drug trafficking is the third biggest global commodity with human trafficking following closely behind. Entry into Afghanistan wasn’t just a geo-political move but had multiple purposes, one of which was to allow Anglo-America to hark back to the British East India’s monopoly of Indochina opium by controlling the drug routes, with the CIA as one of the main suppliers. Drug smuggling and terrorism have a tried and tested symbiotic relationship. It is probable that one could not exist without the other. With the recent fines of imposed on HSBC bank for acting as chosen money launderer for drug cartels the world over it is not an exaggeration that underworld propped up the global economic architecture as toxic assets did their work. In 2015, it won’t be so easy.

The global narcotics market is estimated to be worth between $400-500 billion a year in profits with a more realistic figure being around $100 billion.[3] (Estimates focusing on profits, turnover and trade are routinely confused.) Heroin is the No.1 drug of choice for global addicts and organised crime, the intelligence community, commerce and banking which has effectively blurred to the point that there is no real distinction. International banking is saturated in drug money as a normal part of its financial architecture with IMF estimates at $590 billion and 1.5 trillion dollars in laundered money flowing through sequestered channels each year, representing 2-5 percent of global GDP. [4] That means competition for strategic control over these heroin routes.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) estimates that in 2003, opium production in Afghanistan generated “an income of one billion US dollars for farmers and US $1.3 billion for traffickers, equivalent to over half of its national income.” [5] Almost a decade later, profits had increased by 18 percent alone between 2011 and 2012 according to the United Nations’ 2012 opium survey, which was undertaken with the Afghan Ministry of Counter-narcotics. This is one reason why Obama has reneged on yet another promise to withdraw US troops from the region. Secretary of State John Kerry announced a bilateral security agreement in November 2013 between the United States and Afghanistan that would allow for a lasting American troop presence through 2024. Billions of dollars of international assistance will be given to the government in Kabul, and by default, allow dominance in the drug trade to continue.

opium-fields-2

U.S. Marine Corp in Opium field 2012. (Source: Public Intelligence )

Afghanistan is the largest grower and exporter of opium on the planet with a 92 percent market share of the global opium trade. [6] It is therefore no coincidence that the US military still guards the poppy fields in order to protect their multi-billion dollar trade from the Taliban who know exactly why it is so important to US interests. It was only after the September 11th attacks and the rise of the Mujahedeen that the drugs trade began to really take off. After the Bush Administration gave the go ahead for the US military and NATO allies to invade Afghanistan in October 2001 under the ridiculous label of “Operation Enduring Freedom” opium cultivation increased by 657 percent. [7] Today, the CIA’s dominance in the Golden Crescent drug trafficking region was only made possible with help from the US proxy Afghan government members such as Ahmed Wali Karzai, brother of President Hamid Karzai who had been on the CIA payroll just after the 9/11 attacks. [8] As well as weapons and training, drugs were a central part of the funding of the Afghan war and the role of the Mujahedeen with BCCI acting as launderer. International narcotics traffickers were crawling all over Afghanistan many of whom were on the payroll of the George H. W Bush’s CIA. The Pakistani government and the ISI were known to be a major facilitator of the drug trade. Even before the Soviets had invaded Afghanistan, the CIA had been funding Mujahideen guerrilla groups in the region as a part ISI alliance building.

The CIA’s military-intelligence operation in Afghanistan, and the “Islamic brigades” it created was originally formulated as the usual tactic of triggering civil wars in order to capture resources, be it minerals, opium or oil. In 1973 Afghan Prince Muhammad Daoud deposed the Afghan king with a little help from the Soviet Union, and an Afghan Republic was established. Which is where the CIA jumped in with their plan to fund Islamist extremists, including Gulbuddin Hekmatyar who would go on to be not only the leader in the resistance movement opposing the Soviets, but the most powerful Mujahedeen drug lord in Afghanistan. [9]

hekmatyr1

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (Source: AP/BBC News)

In April, 1985 President Ronald Reagan signed a secret order called the “National Security Decision Directive 166,” which gave the CIA official directives to expel the Russians ‘by all means available.’ Over the next decade the U.S. spent $10 billion to arm and train the Mujahideen. By 1986, while the Iran-Contra scandal was about to loom over the horizon an “overwhelming arsenal of guns and missiles” descended upon Mujahideen from the Reagan administration. Along with these weapons was a massive propaganda push targeting the Afghan schools with “$43 million just for the school textbooks.” This was achieved with the help of the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the CIA working together “providing education behind enemy lines,” and: “… military support against enemies lines.” Afghan war chiefs “…were allowed to decide the school curriculum and the content of the textbooks,” where the content included violence and images of war designed to breed new fighters and condition children resistance towards the Russian invasion. [10] The purposeful stimulation and creation of Islamic fundamentalism was predicated on the CIA’s drug money beginning with Hekmatyar and with a little help from Saudi Arabia, received more than $1 billion. [11]

Located at the crossroads of Central, South, and Western Asia, overlapping Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan, are multi-billion dollar drug routes protected by the US-sponsored government in Kabul. Michel Chossudovsky explains how the narcotics trade is determined by: “A hierarchy of prices” as a farming price in Afghanistan translated to retail price in fashionable cities in the West worth billions of dollars, “… sustained and supported by the US ‘War on Terrorism’.” The proceeds of this vast drug trade is handled by the banks in the following fashion:

hsbc


 HSBC bank was fined over billion pounds for acting as money launderer for a variety of global drug cartels. Since it was only fined and not closed down it is free to continue its activities. Since HSBC and Barclays Bank – who was also fined for rigging the market – are the two main pillars of our present financial architecture closing them down wasn’t an option, since it would mean a total collapse. This was a deflection of objective reality that the core of global banking is both the purveyor and completely dependent on what is normalised fraud and corruption. 

 

Drug money is laundered in the numerous offshore banking havens in Switzerland, Luxembourg, the British Channel Islands, the Cayman Islands and some 50 other locations around the globe. It is here that criminal syndicates involved in the drug trade and the representatives of the world’s largest commercial banks interact. Dirty money is deposited in these offshore havens, which are controlled by major Western banks and financial institutions. The latter, therefore, have a vested interest in maintaining and sustaining the drug trade.

… Once the money has been laundered, it can be recycled into bona fide investments not only in real estate, hotels, etc., but also in other areas such as the services economy and manufacturing. Dirty and covert money is also funneled into various financial instruments including speculative stock exchange transactions (derivatives), primary commodities, stocks and government bonds. [12]

The repercussions of the CIA-Afghan drug lords and the domination of the opium fields meant heroin found an even greater supply from young Americans. [13] In the 1980s drug related deaths shot through the roof as a result. Independent journalist Andrew Gavin Marshall summarises the impact: “… drug-related deaths in New York City rose 77 percent since 1979” and: “By 1981, the drug lords in Pakistan and Afghanistan supplied 60 percent of America’s heroin. Trucks going into Afghanistan with CIA arms from Pakistan would return with heroin ‘protected by ISI papers from police search.’ ” [14]

By 1994, in a religious and economic vacuum Afghanistan saw the rise of the Taliban and its attempts to eradicate drugs and opium field production from the Afghan social landscape. The success in significantly reducing opium production, an economic livelihood for the CIA and Pakistani drug lords, was in large part the reason for the appearance of the Northern Alliance, a military-political umbrella organization created by the Islamic State of Afghanistan in late 1996 under the leadership of Defence Minister and CIA asset Ahmad Shah Massoud. The Afghan Taliban had a war on their hands which comprised of the Pakistan’s military, Al-Qaeda and most of the ethnic groups of Afghanistan including Tajiks, Pashtuns, Hazaras, Uzbeks, Turkmen and others.

In 2002, a campaign against genuine human rights abuses was highlighted as a pretext for removing the Taliban from power even though US/NATO forces had created its original power base in order to help fight the Soviet invasion. Now, presiding over a vast increase in military spending for NATO and the US and despite increasing economic problems at home, opium production went through the roof and straight into the pockets of various interested parties, including Afghan drug lords, Al-Qaeda, the CIA, Pakistani ISI and various Northern Alliance parties. It was carnival time.

What is also conveniently forgotten in so much media commentary is the nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits, identified by the US Pentagon officials which is another reason why the Ghazni Province has become such a jewel in the crown of imperial aspirations. Included in the deposits of iron, copper, cobalt and even gold is possibly the largest source of lithium which is crucial in the production of all electronic devices from lap-tops, to mobile phones, weapons to aircraft consoles, which is why the Pentagon has described it as the “Saudi Arabia of Lithium.” [15]

As New York Times reporter John Risen explains in his 2010 article: “Instead of bringing peace, the newfound mineral wealth could lead the Taliban to battle even more fiercely to regain control of the country. The corruption that is already rampant in the Karzai government could also be amplified by the new wealth, particularly if a handful of well-connected oligarchs, some with personal ties to the president, gain control of the resources.” [16]

2010-06-19-14mineralsgraphicpopup

The United States presence in Afghanistan intended to drive a wedge between those oligarchs and encroaching Chinese interests so that it can corner the market in rare minerals as well as oil and narcotics. However, as the mid-1990s approached, the legacy of US interference in the region and the end of the Soviet-Afghan war had produced a maelstrom of militant Islamic training camps drawing in fighters from all over the world. Osama bin Laden returned from the Sudan in 1996 in order to command his own camps alongside warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar who took the lion’s share of control as the civil war raged about them. Afghanistan has become another narco-state of US induced chaos or, as one warlord exclaims:

“… essentially a lawless country. There is no civil law, no government, no economy—only guns and drugs and anger. … “For us, Afghanistan is destroyed. It is turning to poison, and not only for us but for all others in the world. If you are a terrorist, you can have shelter here, no matter who you are. Day by day, there is the increase of drugs. Maybe one day [the US] will have to send hundreds of thousands of troops to deal with that. And if they step in, they will be stuck. We have a British grave in Afghanistan. We have a Soviet grave. And then we will have an American grave.” [17]

Since 1982 – 1991 Afghan opium production rose from 250 tons to 2,000 tons thanks largely to CIA support and their funding of the Mujahideen. However, bin Laden suffered heavy financial losses in 1991 with the closure of BCCI by US officials and could no longer rely on funding from his CIA superiors. This turn of affairs forced him to launder money from the drug trade to recoup his losses which gradually grew into a financial network, fully merging Islamic militancy with the global drug trade. [18] According to author Roland Jacquard, “… Some of the money was handed back to organizations such as the FIS [a political party in Algeria]. Another portion was transferred by Ayman al-Zawahiri to Switzerland, the Netherlands, London, Antwerp, and Malaysia.” Money was also “… transferred from BCCI to banks in Dubai, Jordan, and Sudan controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood.” [19]

Author Adam Robinson stated in his investigation into bin Laden: “During the summer of 1991 he discreetly made contact with many of the wealthiest of these individuals, especially those with an international network of companies … Within months, Osama unveiled before an astonished al-Turabi what he called ‘the Brotherhood Group.’”

The Muslim Brotherhood and their vast wealth replaced the BCCI as the main source of funding for Islamic militants and allowed a fascist form of Islamism and the growth of Al-Qaeda to flourish, sometimes straining at the leash of the Anglo-American intelligence apparatus. [20]


Notes

[1] ‘Suicides at 10-year high in US military’ Associated Press, guardian.co.uk, June 8, 2012. “In the first 155 days of 2012 there was 154 suicides among active troops, around 50% more than the number killed in action in Afghanistan, according to Pentagon statistics obtained by Associated Press. This is the highest number in 10 years. Combat exposure, post-traumatic stress, misuse of drugs and debt problems blamed for increase.”
[2] ‘US Forced to Import Bullets from Israel as troops use 250,000 for every Rebel killed’ By Andrew Buncombe, The Belfast Telegraph, January 10, 2011. http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/
[3] United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (1997) – ‘World Drugs Report’ | ‘Size of the drug market’ Transfrom Drug policy Foundation http://www.tdpf.org.uk | “In the 2005 World Drugs Report the UNODC put the value at US$13bn at production level, $94bn at wholesale level and US$332bn based upon retail prices. It also acknowledged that the US$400bn figure had been criticised by some experts as being too high.”
[4] ‘HSBC money-laundering scandal almost puts Barclays in shade’ – “Being accused by Senate of operating money-laundering conduit for ‘drug kingpins and rogue nations’ is as bad as it gets” by Nils Pratley, The Guardian, 17 July 2012. | ‘Libor or Money-Laundering? Focus on Arcane Rate Rigging Reveals Deeper Media Prejudice’ By Martin Baccardax, International Business Times, July 17, 2012. | ‘Global banks are the financial services wing of the drug cartels’ By Ed Vulliamy, The Observer, July 21, 2012.
[5] The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) http://www.unodc.org/
[6] UNODC World Drug Report 2011: http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/WDR2011/World_Drug_Report_2011_ebook.pdf (p.20)
[7] ‘War on drugs revealed as total hoax – US military admits to guarding, assisting lucrative opium trade in Afghanistan’ by Ethan A. Huff, Natural News, November 16, 2011.www.naturalnews.com/
[8] ‘Brother of Afghan Leader Said to Be Paid by C.I.A.’By Dexter Filkins, Mark Mazzetti and James Risen. The New York Times, October 27, 2009.
[9] op. cit. Dreyfuss (pp.260-263)
[10] ‘Back to school in Afghanistan’ CBC News Online, January 27, 2004. | The National, Airdate: May 6, 2002 Reporter: Carol Off, Producer: Heather Abbott ,Editor: Catherine McIsaac. | “American interests were well served. But after the defeat of the Soviet empire, the U.S. abandoned Afghanistan. The country descended into civil war. The U.S. gave almost no money to help rebuild after the war against the Soviets and no money to rewrite the school textbooks.”
[11] ‘Sources Claim CIA aid Fuelled Trade Center Blast’ by Colin Milner, Boston Herald, 1994.
[12] pp.232-233; America’s “War on Terrorism” by Michel Chossudovsky, Published by Global Research, 2005.
[13] The CIA has unquestionably been the agency at the forefront of the drugs and turning much of US society into a drug-dependent culture. On the CIA’s website wwwcia.gov/ we read “Helping Them Say No to Drugs” as the title on their “parents and teachers” page. They go on to say: “The CIA is proud to be at the forefront of the War on Drugs, but we only win this war with everyone’s help.” They even have a “kids page”. Rather like a serial killer giving advice on how to counsel his victims with the knife still at their throats.
[14] ‘The Imperial Anatomy of Al-Qaeda:The CIA’s Drug-Running Terrorists and the “Arc of Crisis” Part I By Andrew Gavin Marshall, Global Research, September 05, 2010.
[15]’‘U.S. Identifies Vast Mineral Riches in Afghanistan’By James Risen, The New York Times, June 13, 2010.
[16] Ibid.
[17] ‘Blow-back from the Afghan Battlefield’ By Tim Weiner, The New York Times, 1994.
[18] ‘Drug trade filled coffers of Taliban, Bin Laden Group,’ By James Rosen The Star Tribune, September 30,2001 | ‘Collapse of BCCI shorts Bin Laden’ By Richard Sale, United Press International, March 1, 2001.
[19] In the Name of Osama Bin Laden: Global Terrorism and the Bin Laden Brotherhood by Roland Jacquard, Samia Serageldin (Editor) Published by Diane Pub. Co. 2002. | ISBN-10: 0756767113 (p. 129)
[20] pp.138-139; Bin Laden: Behind the Mask of the Terrorist by Adam Morrison. Published by Arcade Publishing, 2002. | ISBN-10: 1559706406.

Osama and Al-Qaeda I


“The idea which is critical to the FBI¹s prosecution that bin Laden ran a coherent organisation with operatives and cells all around the world of which you could be a member is a myth. There is no Al Qaeda organisation. There is no international network with a leader, with cadres who will unquestioningly obey orders, with tentacles that stretch out to sleeper cells in America, in Africa, in Europe. That idea of a coherent, structured terrorist network with an organised capability simply does not exist.”

- Jason Burke, author, quoted in The Power of Nightmares, documentary

The key to understanding some of the key reasons for the September 11th attacks lies in the history of bin Laden and the creation of Al-Qaeda. The problem is still perpetuated by a common public misconception that there is still a case of “us and them” between government forces and Al-Qaeda terrorism. The American public and some within the 911 Truth Movement and MSM are pressing for culpability for members of the Bush Administration and their part in allowing Al-Qaeda to launch attacks on the United States. So called politicians turned whistleblowers are largely criticising failure of intelligence or incompetence without seeing the root causes which lies at the heart the War on Terror as a piece of large-scale propaganda of which Edward Bernays would have been proud. As author and economist Professor Michel Chossudovsky says:

“… in a bitter irony, the very process of revealing these lies and expressing public outrage has contributed to reinforcing the 9/11 cover-up. ‘Revealing the lies’ serves to present Al-Qaeda as the genuine threat, as an ‘outside enemy’, which threatens the security of America, when in fact Al-Qaeda is a creation of the US intelligence apparatus.” [1]

Al-Qaeda is more of mercenary tool of global intelligence than a real terrorist threat. Regime change and exploitation are its goals. This necessarily incorporates radicalised individuals who serve as patsies and agents furthering the overall geo-strategy. They are a common form of collateral or cannon fodder. There is a wealth of evidence out there for the interested researcher confirming the myth of Al-Qaeda from the mouths of whistleblowers, ex-Intel operatives, politicians, statesmen, authors and academics.

Leonid Shebarshin ex-chief of the Soviet Foreign Intelligence Service, who heads the Russian National Economic Security Service consulting company, said in an interview for the Vremya Novostei newspaper, that Al-Qaeda was an “all-mighty ubiquitous myth deliberately linked to Islam” in order to target “…the oil-rich Muslim regions.” He further commented: “The U.S. has usurped the right to attack any part of the globe on the pretext of fighting the terrorist threat…” and with military bases in Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, Shebarshin said, “the United States has already established control over the Caspian region — one of the world’s largest oil reservoirs.” [2]

938px-Flag_of_Jihad.svg

The Shahada – the Flag of Jihad often seen flying with Al-Qaeda, Taliban and ISIL (Source: wikipedia creative commons)

It is here that the Three Establishment Model (3EM) interests converge. They do so from the seemingly innocuous beginnings of the Safari Club which had its relatively humble beginnings in homage to the colonial hunters of the British Elite, Cecil Rhodes and the Round Table.

Russell E. Train (cousin of John Train, the Pilgrims Society member and former financial advisor to CIA-ally John Hay Whitney) was a co-founder of the African Wildlife Foundation set up since 1961. According to Train’s biography his Foundation had drifted away from the Safari Club which was in existence before 1958 and coyly described by him as “a newly formed organization set up by a local group of businessmen who had gone on a hunt together in Mozambique.” [3] Although certainly a white man’s big-game hunting troupe for Pan-European and Anglo-American big-wigs, one of these businessmen and founders was Kermit Roosevelt Jr. who had set up the club as an anti-communist outpost, the evolution of which was given the seal of approval by Henry Kissinger several years later. Among other states, Saudi Arabia had a large hand in financing operations in Morocco, Egypt and Iran, with a view to countering Soviet operations in the Middle East and Africa. [4]

The other important founder was Count Alexandre de Marenches, the director of French intelligence services representing Pan-European Synarchism in the region. It would represent next phase in Anglo-American dominance in Africa. The WWF and the 1001 club were involved in its formation via Train, Arthur Windsor Arundel and Sue Erpf van de Bovenkamp[5]

With Nixon booted out over the Watergate Scandal 1974, this saw the arrival of a new breed of psychopaths in power who would preside over criminal rule just as they did on 9/11: Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld; Chief of Staff, Dick Cheney; Vice president Nelson Rockefeller (brother of David) and George H.W. Bush as CIA Director, who joined the Ford Administration and the Kissinger cabal. Under this motley crew, 1976 would see the consolidation of a coalition of intelligence agencies that would begin the comprehensive carving up of Africa. The Safari Club would become the central hub for American intelligence financing and organizing an international network of terrorists, the CIA’s role in the global drug trade, the emergence of the Taliban and the origins of Al-Qaeda.

The Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) formerly a small Pakistani merchant bank was transformed into an ISI/CIA front for the biggest world-wide money laundering enterprise in history. Its job was to accrue a network of banks to finance intelligence in Africa and other nations. Under Bush, the intelligence groups in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iran worked closely with the CIA who found could out-source their Intel operations through these nations which otherwise have been logistically difficult not least because French intelligence was still at the helm of the Safari Club.

1977 was the year that the Trilateral Commission were able to exercise their power more actively through Jimmy Carter’s administration, though in truth, the real power was sourced from Zbigniew Brzezinski as National Security Advisor, just one of many Trilaterals which infested the government at that time. Foreign policy would be steered towards Trilateral objectives which saw the colonisation of Eurasia as vital in eroding the power of the Soviet Union, seen as a continuing threat to US supremacy resource scarcity. Iran would become the fulcrum of revolution which would lead to the destabilization of Russia and her interests. “There was this idea that the Islamic forces could be used against the Soviet Union. The theory was, there was an arc of crisis, and so an arc of Islam could be mobilized to contain the Soviets. It was a Brzezinski concept.” [6] The same old patterns of interference ensued.

Brzezinski_1977

Zibigniew Brzezinski 1977 (wikipedia)

In 1953, the United States’ CIA initiated a coup in Iran under the codename of Operation AJAX, which sought to remove the democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh. Almost thirty years later the Royal Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the dictator of Iran was suddenly no longer useful and Anglo-American allegiances now supported the fundamentalist Islamic opposition of Ayatollah Khomeini in favour of containment regarding Russia and access to oil. The media propaganda went into full swing for Revolution as preparations for a military coup inside Iran. In 1979, a coup proved unnecessary and Ayatollah Khomeini was smoothly installed as the Ayatollah of an Islamic Republic of Iran.

Much like the kinds of US-NATO-led CoIntelpro we saw in Libya and Syria in the lasy few years, human rights abuses, real and imagined, were floated excessively in the media. As social tensions rose in Iran the Shah’s secret police the notorious SAVAK were encouraged by US diplomats to embark on a campaign: “of ever more brutal repression, in a manner calculated to maximize popular antipathy to the Shah.” True to form, the Shah fell into the trap laid by Zbigniew Brzezinski who had advised him: “… to be firm” in the face of demonstrations. [7]

After assisting the installation of fundamentalist Islam and just prior to the Iran-Iraq war Brzezinski met with Saddam Hussein and gave his support for the war ensuring that arms would be secured with the support of Arab oil-producing nations such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. [8] Though this war provided a bonanza for weapons manufacturers in the US, Britain and Russia it also served the American interests in fermenting continuing radicalism in the region so that pockets of conflict and the background of war would serve as cover for securing economic interests.

Meanwhile, as Islamic fundamentalism had been seeded and watered in Iran, Osama bin Laden had left Saudi Arabia to train the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan which the US government were training, arming, and funding to the tune of $3 billion thanks again to Brzezinski transplanting the Islamic foreign policy over to the “holy War.” Very soon, as the late Robert I. Freidman describes in The CIA’s Jihad: “… young Muslim men from across the Arab world, as well as from the U.S., flocked to Mujahedeen base camps outside Peshawar, Pakistan, where they were instructed in everything from making car bombs to shooting down Russian MiGs with U.S.-made Stinger missiles. Most of these recruits were fanatical Islamic fundamentalists who despised America just as much as they hated the Communist occupiers, but the CIA was willing to overlook that.” [9]

Osama bin Laden’s leadership in Afghanistan was vital in driving out Russia. The pretext used on this occasion was that the incumbent Afghan government was communist, which it wasn’t. The enormous investment handled by the CIA meant the creation and consolidation of bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda terrorist network with the blessing of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan – and American tax-payers’ money. [10] Brzezinski’s strategy to lay a trap for Russia whereby the Mujahedeen’s guerrilla war would embroil the Soviet Union in their own Vietnam was supremely successful, leading to its withdrawal and eventual collapse. [11]

october_87-muja

Afghan Mujahedeen,October 1987. By Erwin Lux (Wikipedia Creative Commons)

Now that the Safari Club had managed to send out the word through its extensive network of intelligence, numerous new recruits were harvested for the glorious jihad and holy war taking place in Afghanistan. Ahmed Rashid writing in Foreign Affairs explained: “With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan’s ISI, who wanted to turn the Afghan Jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan’s fight between 1982 and 1992. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. Eventually, more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad.” [12]

Bcci_logoIslamic fundamentalism provided ample opportunity for martyrdom with a fantasy paradise of umpteen virgins waiting for their courageous warriors should they take up arms against the Russian infidels. By the time the Reagan Administration took over Vice President George H.W. Bush made sure the BCCI banking funds were on hand for an expansion of operations in Afghanistan and other regions primed for divide and conquer tactics. Journalist Seymour Hersh termed the Safari Club a “private intelligence group [which was] one of George H. W. Bush’s many end-runs around congressional oversight of the American intelligence establishment and the locus of many of the worst features of the mammoth BCCI scandal.” [13]

Australian journalist John Pilger also placed the onus firmly in the Anglo-American intelligence structure: “More than 100,000 Islamic militants were trained in Pakistan between 1986 and 1992, in camps overseen by CIA and MI6, with the SAS [British Special Forces] training future al-Qaida and Taliban fighters in bomb-making and other black arts. Their leaders were trained at a CIA camp in Virginia. This was called Operation Cyclone and continued long after the Soviets had withdrawn in 1989.” [14]

taliban

Taliban fighters

In the early 1980’s Osama bin Laden already had firmly established ties between Saudi intelligence agency (GIP) their favourite Afghan warlord Abdul Rasul Sayyaf and the Intel chief, and possible middle man for the Mujahedeen groups – Prince Turki al-Faisal, bin Laden’s friend. Though bin Laden “…did have a substantial relationship with Saudi intelligence,” as journalist Steve Coll stated, he was likely not an agent. The CIA and the Safari Club were both working through al-Faisal and “ISI stooge and creation” war-lord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar in Afghanistan as well as the Pakistani ISI which had now become a powerful adjunct to the CIA thanks to General (later President) Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq’s military coup of 1977 who assumed the presidency in 1978. [15] It was no coincidence that Haq passed pro-Islamic legislation, created Islamic banking systems, and Islamic courts and introduced a new religious tax for the creation of tens of thousands of madrassas, or religious boarding schools. This was an offshoot of US policy to build radical Islam, via education that would indoctrinate generations of future Islamic militants for decades to come. This extended to the Pakistani military where “Radical Islamist ideology began to permeate the military and the influence of the most extreme groups crept into the army…” [16]

In 1984, bin Laden moved to Peshawar, a Pakistani town on the border of Afghanistan, so that he could help set up and run Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK) (meaning “Services Office” in English). This was a front organisation for the Mujahideen which funnelled weapons, money, and willing Jihad fighters from all over the burgeoning militant Islamic network straight into the increasingly ferocious Afghan war. [17] Meantime, Pakistan’s General Akhtar Abdul-Rahman met bin Laden on a regular basis in the city for Intel and financial dealings related to drug profits from the opium fields which by then were totalling around $100 million. By 1985, bin Laden and the ISI – effectively the CIA – were splitting the proceeds. [18]

202_george_bush_sr

George H. W. Bush and BCCI

Rahman was a close friend of Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq, who by now was a CIA asset and recognised as an international drug trafficker at Interpol. A top US official said that Haq “was our man… everybody knew that Haq was also running the drug trade” and that “BCCI was completely involved.” [19] Then CIA Director William Casey and Vice President George H. W. Bush were fully aware of the connection and while meeting Haq in Pakistan allowed him to move his drug money through the BCCI in return for his role in the program which was to provide Intel, keep the radical Islamic factions at fever pitch and finance the war on terror network. On one such secret visit to training camps near the Afghan border in 1984, the CIA director spoke of a strategy to “… take the Afghan war into enemy territory—into the Soviet Union itself. Casey wanted to ship subversive propaganda through Afghanistan to the Soviet Union’s predominantly Muslim southern republics.” [20] It proved easy to do so. However, it would only be 3 years later that the two Generals Rahman and Haq would both be killed in a plane crash in 1988, widely believed to have been sabotage conducted by the MOSSAD who were concerned about Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation instigated by Haq. [21]

Zia_ul-Haq

Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq circa 1977

In 1990, the blind Egyptian cleric, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman was travelling to the United States in style – and on a CIA-supported, one-year visa as a reward for his propagandizing lectures in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Much to the confusion and consternation of many intelligence agents he was also on a State Department terrorism watch list that should have barred him from the country. Hand-picked as a spellbinder in order to whip up disaffected Arab immigrants for the required Holy War and in turn, to stir the support for Muslim rebels needed to topple the Soviet-backed government in Afghanistan, Rahman was proving an extremely useful part of a burgeoning Islamist network of agents. There were “Jihad offices” in Atlanta, Jersey City, and Dallas, the most important being the “Al-Kedah” (meaning “struggle”) set up in Brooklyn, New York, as the Al-Kedah Refugee Centre which served as fertile ground for Rahman and others’ spellbinding skills.

However, the winds of “blowback” were beginning to whistle through the ranks of Arab-CIA assets, most of whom gave lectures at Al-Kedah which would eventually be implicated in the World Trade Centre Bombings in 1993. Over $600 million was funnelled to this precursor organization to Al-Qaeda and from several smaller outfits benefiting from CIA funds along with rich Pakistani and Saudi Arabian donors. [22] It would continue to be the main financial hub for CIA chaperoned, Al-Qaeda terrorists so that they could continue to create their cells within the United States, heavily monitored and managed by the FBI and CIA. In the words of private Washington attorney and former investigative counsel for the Senate Foreign Relation, Jack Blum stated: “We steered and encouraged these people. Then we dropped them. Now we’ve got a disposal problem. When you motivate people to fight for a cause – jihad – the problem is, how do you shut them off?” [23]

wtc1993

World Trade Centre Bombings 1993 – Another FBI entrapment set up?

But it was much more than simply forgetting to switch off a tap. This was adapted to a much larger long-term objective where Al-Qaeda would come home to roost and serve as the bogeyman for a highly ambitious attack on American soil. The object of the CIA exercise was to keep other US agencies and even certain team members from looking too closely into the various issues related to assassinations and terrorist attacks on the homeland. As a growing number of FBI and CIA whistleblowers have proven – not always an easy thing to accomplish.

Another CIA asset rubbing shoulders with bin Laden was Sheikh Abdullah Azzam, a Palestinian preacher/spellbinder recruited from a small village Jenin, ostensibly as a diplomatic tool for uniting squabbling rebel factions in Pakistan. He became bin-Laden’s mentor persuading him to join the Jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Azzam was asset gold due to his connections the Muslim Brotherhood, Saudi intelligence, and the Muslim World League and the Islamic Coordination Council in Peshawar, which supervised the military activities of the Arab Mujahedeen. Meantime, he could sip martinis and chat with the air stewardesses as he travelled for his frequent lectures in New York, at Al-Kifah and the Al-Farooq Mosque in Brooklyn and the Al-Salam Mosque in Jersey City calling for the “spark” of revolution “… that may one day burn Western interests all over the world.” As Freidman wryly mentions, a fact which drew so many of the CIA assets: “Azzam then asked his audience for donations, made out to his personal account at the Independent Savings Bank.” [24]

Having got too big for his Keffiyeh, Azzam was eventually murdered in a car bomb after accruing many enemies, including Osama bin Laden. No one really knew who had pressed the button but most were glad someone had. As with all allegations of foreknowledge and duplicity the CIA always plays dumb. As a New York investigator observed: “Left with the choice between pleading stupidity or else admitting deceit, the CIA went with stupidity.” [25]

From 1984 onwards the CIA’s ability to twist itself into a spaghetti junction of lies became tragi-comic. As covert importation of Al-Qaeda terrorist and Islamic militants continued via MAK, one Ali Mohammed came to the attention of the media. A  major in the Egyptian army and a US operative he was tasked with training Islamic militants within the US. As yet another visitor to the Al-Kifah Centre and part of the army unit that was responsible for the assassination of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat he was involved in a special training program for foreign officers at the US Army Special Forces School at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, as far back as 1981. Mohammed was apparently purged from the Egyptian Army after the assassination and joined the Green Berets, reportedly travelling to Afghanistan in 1992 to aid the Mujahedeen.

In 1984, US officials told the media that they were forced to remove Mohammed due to his religious beliefs which were considered too extreme. Mohamed found his way to the CIA in Egypt and asked to join as a spy. (It’s as easy as that). CIA subsequently decided that he couldn’t be trusted on account of his associations with Hezbollah. He found himself on a terrorist watch list order to prevent him from coming to the US. However, Mohamed turned up with a brand new visa and moved to America sailing through customs without any problems, with the US State Department choosing not to explain to a thoroughly confused media. [26] Like so many of these stories, they are quickly forgotten.

In 1995, it was revealed at the trial of terrorist Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman, that Mohammed had been admitted to the US under a special visa program controlled by the CIA’s clandestine service. A subsequent search of his New Jersey home turned up forty boxes of evidence which had the D.A.’s office and the FBI looked at it more carefully, would have revealed an active terrorist conspiracy about to boil over in New York. In addition to discovering thousands of rounds of ammunition and hit lists with the names of New York judges and prosecutors, investigators found amongst the evidence classified U.S. military-training manuals. They also found a video made at Fort Bragg featuring the Green Beret Ali Mohammed lecturing U.S. officers and officials on the politics of Jihad. On the video, Ali Mohammed sounds oddly like a radical fundamentalist himself, declaring that the Muslim world will never accept the existence of Israel.

The CIA was lying again and not quite getting away with it. Nonetheless, no action was taken and before long, Mohammed had found himself a wife and had settled into the American dream.

cook_robinRobin Cook

The late Robin Cook as UK Foreign Secretary, was outspoken in his resistance to the Iraq war and the lies of the then Prime Minister Tony Blair. Cook was one of the very few who resigned over the issue to become an ordinary back-bencher, stating: “I can’t accept collective responsibility for the decision to commit Britain now to military action in Iraq without international agreement or domestic support.” Cook also wanted to stop the export of aerospace jet fighters to General Suharto’s repressive regime in Indonesia. As he told the Guardian: “we will not permit the sale of arms to regimes that might use them for internal repression or international aggression. We shall spread the values of human rights, civil liberties and democracy which we demand for ourselves”. He was to be a vehement opponent and thorn in the side of the Blair government before his untimely death.

Many insiders believed that Cook was destined for a senior Cabinet post under the Brown premiership but this would have been problematic for the British Establishment who was set on Middle Eastern conquest. As Foreign Secretary, Cook would have had plenty of access to intelligence reports and related operations abroad. He is known to have considerably ruffled some feathers by breaking the official secrets act and discussing policy and future proposals. He was to do this in spectacular fashion by famously and courageously speaking the truth regarding the War on Terror and the nature of Al-Qaeda which was “literally ‘the database’, and in Cook’s words: “… originally the computer file of the thousands of Mujahedeen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians.” [27] The Guardian article appeared just after the 7/7 bombings and the incendiary speeches by Cook. Whatever ball the respected politician had started to roll it was not to last.

Robin Cook’s legacy in standing for truth was corroborated by a former French Intelligence agent Pierre-Henri Bunel, who wrote an article for the World Affairs journal based in New Dehli in 2004 where he repeated so many top level analysts’ conclusions: “The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the ‘devil’ only in order to drive the ‘TV watcher’ to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US and the lobbyists for the US war on terrorism are only interested in making money.[28]

This is where global drugs market comes in…

 


Notes

[1] ‘“Revealing the Lies” on 9/11 Perpetuates the “Big Lie”’ by Michel Chossudovsky – Text of Michel Chossudovsky’s keynote presentation at the opening plenary session (27 May 2004) to The International Citizens Inquiry Into 9/11, Toronto, 25-30 May 2004. http://www.globalresearch.ca 27 May 2004.
[2] ‘Russian Intelligence Chief Says Al-Qaeda A Myth,’ MosNews| March 21, 2005.
[3] p.39; Politics, Pollution, and Pandas: An Environmental Memoir By Russell E. Train, Published by Island Press 2003.
[4] Good Muslim, Bad Muslim: America, the Cold War and the roots of Terror by Mahmood Mamdani, Published by Three Leaves Publishing; Reprint edition, 2005. ISBN-10: 0385515375. (p.84)
[5] ‘World Wildlife Fund: The 1001 Club Mafia dons, intelligence agents, and raw materials executives striving for a sustainable future’ http://www.whale.to
[6] p.67; Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America by Peter Dale-Scott, Published by University of California Press, 2008. ISBN-10: 0520258711.
[7] Ibid. (p.81)
[8] The eight year Iran/Iraq war (1980-1988) is remembered as one of the most shockingly harrowing conflicts of the 20th century. It was reminiscent of the First World War in terms of sheer numbers of dead; territory shifting back and forth between the two sides like bone-dry seas, heavy with the burden of teenage corpses and the endless pain of grieving families. It was a lucrative time for the US, Russia, and various European nations eager to extend this barbarism in order to squeeze out the highest profits from a whole generation of beleaguered youths. Meanwhile, the rest of the Middle East looked on, until the final combined casualty list total reached one million. The combined profit from these arms deals however, is unknown, but we can guess at the obscene sums of money accrued. To further compound the misery and the arrogance of its leaders, nightmarish monuments were erected on the backs of an already broken people: the fountain of blood in Teheran, the soldier statuaries in Basrah and two giant crossed swords clasped by equally giant arms modelled on Hussein himself. They were also cast in a British foundry. It is testament to Zbigniew Brzezinski’s skill as a geo-political tactician and strategist as it is his cold absence of conscience.
[9] ‘The CIA’s Jihad’ By Robert I. Friedman, June 30, 2002. Current View Point -www.currentviewpoint.com
[10] ‘Who is Osama Bin Laden? BBC News, 18 September, 2001.
[11] ‘The Soviets’ Vietnam’. Richard Cohen Washington Post. April 22, 1988.
[12] ‘The Taliban: Exporting Extremism’, by Ahmed Rashid, Foreign Affairs, Issue November-December 1999.
[13] ‘Seymour Hersh and the men who want him committed’, Salon.com by Matthew Phelan, February 28 2011.
[14] ‘Why Good Friends left behind.” By John Pilger, The Guardian, September 20, 2003.
[15] ‘It ain’t over till it’s over’ By Marc Erikson Asia Times November 15 2001.
[16] I Is for Infidel: From Holy War to Holy Terror: 18 Years Inside Afghanistan by Kathy Gannon, Published by Public Affairs, 2005. |ISBN-10: 1586483129. | (pp.138-142)
[17] ‘The Real Bin Laden’ by Mary Jane Weaver, The New Yorker, 2000.
[18] p. 29; Why America Slept: The Failure to Prevent 9/11. By Gerald Posner, Published by Random House, 2003.| ISBN-10: 0375508791.
[19] op. cit. Dale-Scott, (pp. 73-75).
[20] ‘Anatomy of a Victory, the CIA’s Covert Afghan War’ by Steve Coll Washington Post, July 19 1992.
[21] ‘Editorial:Another clue into General Zia’s death’ Daily Times Pakistan, December 2005. […] “former US ambassador to India, John Gunther Dean, suspects that General Zia ul Haq was killed by the Israelis. This is interesting enough but perhaps would not have made it beyond the slew of conspiracy theories that have been cropping up since Zia was killed in a C-130 plane crash if the US State Department had not chosen to ignore Mr Dean and later cashier him on grounds of being mentally imbalanced.
According to Ms Crossette’s account under the title ‘Reflections — Who Killed Zia?’, Mr Dean suspects that General Zia, his top commanders, the US ambassador to Pakistan, Arnold Raphael, and a US brigadier-general were killed by the Israeli secret agency Mossad because Tel Aviv was concerned about Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions following a statement by General Zia in 1987 that Pakistan was a “screwdriver’s turn away from the bomb”.But when Mr Dean expressed his views to the State Department at the time and insisted that the US must thoroughly investigate the Israeli-Indian axis, the Department accused him of mental imbalance and relieved him of his duties; this, despite that fact that Mr Dean was a distinguished diplomat who had garnered more ambassadorships than most envoys. Ms Crossette says that Mr Dean, now 80, wants the stigma of mental imbalance removed and is collecting his papers and is ready to share his thoughts. He lost his medical and security clearance because of his views and was forced to seek retirement in 1988.”[…]
[22] pp. 279-280; Devil’s Game: How the United States Helped Unleash Fundamentalist Islam by Robert Dreyfuss (American Empire Project) Published by Metropolitan Books; 2005 | ISBN-10: 0805076522.
[23] op. cit. Freidman.
[24] Ibid.
[25] Ibid.
[26] ‘The Masking of a Militant’ By Benjamin Weiser and James Risen – A Soldier’s Shadowy Trail In U.S. and in the Mideast The New York Times, December 1, 1998.
[27] ‘The struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means – The G8 must seize the opportunity to address the wider issues at the root of such atrocities’ By Robin Cook, The Guardian, July 8, 2005.
[28] ‘Al Qaeda: The Database’ By Pierre-Henri Bunel, Global Research, May 12, 2011 | Wayne Madsen Report 20 November, 2005.

Pretexts and PNAC


  “There is no telling how many wars it will take to secure freedom in the homeland.”

- George W. Bush, speech on August 7, 2002

Hoodwinking the public into accepting wars is a very old tactic indeed. Under the tutelage of the British Empire, the United States of America has been one of the most violent “democracies” on earth. So-called US “interventions” as world policeman have been taking place in most vulnerable regions of the world for well over one hundred years. Given that most of the so-called threats against Western democracy are either a) weak and debt-ridden countries; b) installed with a US-NATO proxy dictator and c) ripe for resource picking. America and Britain’s record of invasion doesn’t stack up with the axis-of-evil regimes such as Iran who have never attacked anyone in over 200 years.

There was a reason that the Bush Administration’s then Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove had on his desk copies of The Prince by Nicolo Machiavelli and The Art of War by Sun Tzu: they are  both classics in the psychology of deception and tactics of military warfare, something dear to this man’s shrivelled heart. This was the same Senior Advisor of the most powerful man who believes in the idea of a “reality-based community,” or “believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” Rather like his colleague Michael Leeden, another Neo-Conservative /authoritarian who believes in deception and lies as a way to gain the upper hand. (More on Leeden in a later post).

Rove seems to be a fine example of political psychopathy which advocates an entirely subjective reality based on Empire-desire where reality is what you make it. Or in his own words: 

“That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” …“We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” [1]

bush-rove

Another overshadowing Iago: Karl Rove

Government-sponsored terrorism or “synthetic terror” has been a part of warfare since before Sun Tzu’s Art of War from the 6th Century BC. If the enemy is too large then the abiding manoeuvre is always to divide in order to conquer. Since “All warfare is based on deception” it stands to reason that secrecy under the guise of freedom must underlie all operations, where future plans are as:

“… dark and impenetrable as night …” and where the public are programmed to: “Engage … with what they expect; it is what they are able to discern and confirms their projections. It settles them into predictable patterns of response, occupying their minds while you wait for the extraordinary moment — that which they cannot anticipate.” [2]

The September 11th attacks was one such moment.

The focus of deception was gradually transferred from the battle-field and mercenary colonialism to the civilian populations as targets. Western democracy began to rise through electoral politics and International banking and their weapons manufacturers had to move with the times by using propaganda and social science to deliver jingoistic consent for globalism. After all, if a British or American Empire is seeking new countries to invade, convert and exploit you need a ready supply of willing young men to die for it.

From the British Empire to Pax Americana, once the belief that “God is on our side” is promoted as self-evident through the progress of power, then targeted countries inhabited by “savages”, “communists” or “Islamists” are then cultivated and demonised as “evil,” the beliefs systems of which have been purposely assisted to manifest extremes in order to make it easy for the mass mind. Bombing and black ops can begin so that Christian democracy can elevate a backward nation and control its destiny for resource management. The public consciousness is then flooded with propaganda in press, film and chat shows to “stiffen the sinews” and “conjure up the blood” so that they might find themselves in a condition of self-righteous indignation and actually demand that their governments take action. It becomes as easy to equate the Sandinistas of Nicaragua with an insidious plot to topple American freedoms as it is to fuse Osama bin Laden with Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destructions with Iraq.

100_3257

US-Israeli hegemony steered by the hidden hand of British banking interests has made the business of neo-imperialism the number one reason for conflict in the world. As long as the cosy relationship with arms manufacturers and US defence Dept. continues to buy Congress, which in turn, restricts any alternative economic models then the Empire can continue to expand under the guise of “intervention.” So, why the constant reference to pearl harbour when people mention the Neo-Cons and 9/11?

Lt. Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Naval Intelligence designed an eight step plan for President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in order to provoke an attack from Japan and thus involve the United States in the War. The October 1940 memorandum called for an economic embargo, stopping weapons shipments to Japan’s adversaries and the blockade of Tokyo’s ports preventing access to essential raw materials. This could only lead to a confrontation with America.

The FDR government and the US Navy had foreknowledge of the attack in much the same way as factions within the Bush Administration and related shadow government agencies knew about 9/11 and perhaps had a hand in its planning.  US cables tracked the Japanese fleet to Pearl Harbour, keeping tabs on its course right up to the “surprise attack”. While top US Navy personnel were barred from accessing intelligence reports regarding the approach of the Japanese destroyers and their pilots. The deaths of over three thousand American service men; massive destruction of the US Navy fleet and the transformation from huge public resistance to the war to unbridled horror and outrage at such a dastardly act, ensured entry into the War, central to US dominance in the Asia-Pacific. [3]

The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was an American think tank with a blueprint for a contemporary Pearl Harbour writ large in Neo-Conservative lettering. PNAC signatories and members included Florida governor Jeb Bush; Cheney’s chief of staff, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, who was indicted for perjury in October 2005; Elliot Abrams, who became Bush’s top Middle East aide at the National Security Council. Others included and chairman William Kristol, directors Robert Kagan, John Bolton and Bruce Jackson. Norman Podhoretz; Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Dr. Dov S. Zakheim and the Dark lord Dick Cheney himself, were all members and hawks desperate for perpetual war as policy.

PNAC’s 1997 statement of principles wished to remind Americans of past “lessons” and “consequences” which called for a “Reaganite policy of military strength and moral clarity.” Signatories believed: “we need to increase spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future.”

PNAC_logo

Reading beneath the euphemistic verbiage means they desperately wished to increase defence expenditure in order to carry their imperialistic visions or in other words : “strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values.” This translates as power-sharing with countries who think the same, but only insofar as it supports their objectives for global dominance. Regime change equates to “challenging” nations which do not agree with US foreign policy having little to do with humanitarian and democratic values. Thus the: “need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad” means an expansion of covert strategic, tactical and psychological operations or “dirty tricks.” This is all wrapped up in the polite, civilised language of benign politicians seeking only a benign form of interventionism which masks a ponerological injunction of decidedly grim intentions. They state a: “need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.”[4]

The term “Neo-Conservatism” was coined by political scientist Michael Harrington in the mid 1970s to describe a new form of conservatism which incorporated elements of intellectual liberalism and socialist principles. It claimed to be anti-Utopian yet was even further removed from the pragmatism and reality consensus it professed to embody. Jewish Intellectual and former Trotskyist Irving Kristol has been dubbed the “godfather” of Neo-Conservatism and generally recognised as being responsible for its genesis. As discussed in the World State Policies  and World Revolution series, Neo-Conservatism is an exact fusion of Fabian socialism, Keynesian economics and the ideology of international revolution suffused with a Christian Zionist bias. In other words, it is a new form of National Socialism/Illuminism forging neo-fascism most obviously through the complete corporatisation of the State which is then exported internationally through the geopolitics of coloured revolutions. It is little wonder it has attracted turbo-charged psychopaths like bees to honey. It is political psychopathy writ large, or as exactly as psychologist Andrew M. Lobaczewski described such channels of pathology in the title of his profoundly important book: Political Ponerology: The Science of the Nature of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes. 

kristol1

Irving Kristol circa 1965

Getting high on Irving Kristol’s intellectual justification for a new kind of conservatism wasn’t the only major influence for the rise of Neo-Conservatism and the subsequent formation of PNAC. A bedrock of inspiration and ideology can be found in an 1999 essay called “Leo Strauss and the World of Intelligence (by Which we do not mean Nous)” written by Neo-Conservative academic Abram Shulsky and PNAC co-founder Gary Schmitt. Both of these intellectuals studied under the Jewish political philosopher Leo Strauss who arrived in the United States in 1938 and a key figure in Neo-Conservative ideology. Given that he believed that all intelligence work comprises of deception and counter-deception across governments and society at large, the essay can be seen as a subtle exercise in the importance of understanding the vagaries of cultural differences assigned to “regimes” and how such knowledge could institute a form of change. It doesn’t take an academic’s mind to reveal that the type of change sought for is distinctly fascist in flavour,  with a high proportion of its advocates straddling both Zionist and Conservative Establishment circles. Thus, Zio-Conservatives is often a more appropriate label.

Kristol maintains, is not an ideology but a “persuasion,” a way of thinking about politics rather than a compendium of principles and axioms.[12]The importance of concealing one’s true intentions from the public while informing the party faithful with coded words is also a part of the the art of deception. In terms of polity and the intelligence apparatus, it has never been clearer that this is the only thing that mattered. Necessity is not the mother of invention for Neo-Conservatives; rather necessity gives birth to deception as a means to policy ends. [5]

Schmitt and Shulsky admit that political life: “… may be closely linked to deception. Indeed, it suggests that deception is the norm in political life, and the hope, to say nothing of the expectation, of establishing a politics that can dispense with it is the exception.” So, they chose to embrace this deception fully and completely,  which is hardly a surprise given that Strauss was an advocate of secrecy, hierarchy and Elite authoritarianism where the psychology of leaders was of little consequence.

Straussian principles of “Might is Right” and the “Ends justify the Means” is music to the ears of authoritarian personalities which channel their frustrated energies into modern think-tanks much like PNAC forerunner. Secular democracy was contemptuous for Strauss and in true authoritarian form he believed in the fusion of Church and State as a means to exert control over the masses, but not necessarily to prop up any religious belief in the architects themselves. Ordinary people once again, are seen as a mass of uncontrolled instinct to be sternly managed by Papa Strauss.

leostrauss

Leo Strauss

And this brings us back to Pearl Harbour. What is perhaps most telling in the context of 911 and PNAC is the Machiavellian nature of Straussian belief which was twisted into something beyond the mere philosophical. Shadia B. Dury Professor of political science at the University of Calgary and author of Leo Strauss and the American Right (1999) states: “Perpetual war, not perpetual peace, is what Straussians believe in,” which stems from Strauss’s belief: “… that a political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat,”… he maintained that “if no external threat exists then one has to be manufactured.[6]

Military pre-eminence via the changing face of technology is the subject explored in the figurehead document of PNAC which we have mentioned before: “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” (1997) and which discusses “… the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor”. The Pearl Harbour event is mentioned again later on in the document: “Absent a rigorous program of experimentation to investigate the nature of the revolution in military affairs as it applies to war at sea, the Navy might face a future Pearl Harbor – as unprepared for war in the post-carrier era as it was unprepared for war at the dawn of the carrier age”. [7]

Though the emphasis is on the unpreparedness of military technology, when taken with Neo-Conservative politicising as a whole, this is merely cover for a pre-emptive doctrine which, if not signalling a nudge and a wink towards the planning of a monumental false-flag operation of which only a select handful may have been aware, then it was the tacit support of such a scenario, should the opportunity present itself.

911-terrorist-attack-Pearl_harbour

9/11: The New Pearl Harbour?

From banking, think-tanks and the military the same script is being followed. The reference to “catastrophic and catalyzing event” can be found by arch-esoteric writer for the Elite crowd Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book, The Grand Chessboard and his discussion on America where he states: “… it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat.” This is no throw-away comment coming from one of the creators of the Al-Qaeda network, alongside the CIA involvement in the Soviet-Afghan conflict. Tracing this meme further, we can find his comrade David Rockefeller in an address to the United Nations Business Council in 1994 touting the same fervent desire: “We are on the verge of global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.”

execu3

Executive laws laid down by the Bush Administration and ready to enforce for President Barack Obama (click on above text for greater resolution) Source: Infrakshun.

Following the PATRIOT Act and PATRIOT Act II was the Home Security Act which was recently updated by former human rights lawyer President Barack Obama. The executive orders currently in the Federal Register can be passed without a whiff of red tape should a National emergency suddenly materialize. And most importantly, prior congressional approval is not needed for such directives – they are instantly effective once the National Emergency is implemented. (See left).

The body responsible for enforcing these orders is the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) which has long been recognized as being a whole lot more than just an administrative agency during times of environmental disaster or National emergency. In fact, it has the most extraordinary capabilities that would leave any dictator beaming with anticipation. The true nature of FEMA has been nurtured for its role in overseeing the coming police state by branches of a Shadow Government that have been working steadily behind the scenes in conjunction with the military to ensure that a potent National Emergency can be engineered as part of the Plan for World Order. These branches include the National Security Council, Joint Chiefs of Staff and the National Program Office, all of which have an interesting history of deception. FEMA is a hermetically sealed symbol of totalitarian muscle, answering only to the National Security council, which in turn answers only to the Shadow Government.

Executive laws are immediately enforceable but they cannot be restricted or altered by any department or individual – not even congress. If we follow the narrative from commentators in the last ten years from all sides of the political divide are we to expect, at some point in the future, a “terrorist attack” on Congress? Striking at the heart of a perceived democracy would put paid to any ideological resistance at home, and to certain degree, abroad. Remarkably, there already exists a commission to take over in the event of all or most of congress somehow being unable to fulfil their civic duty. Ingeniously named the “Continuity of Government Commission” they had this to say on their main page:

“In the fall of 2002, the Continuity of Government Commission was launched to study and make recommendations for the continuity of our government institutions after a catastrophic attack. September 11th raises the possibility that foreign enemies might seriously disrupt the filling of vacancies in Congress, presidential succession, and achieving a quorum for the Court so much so that our basic institutions might not function in a normal constitutional manner.” [8]

Behind these apparently measured PNAC proposals was masked a virulent form of war-mongering. In January 1998, PNAC published an open letter to President Clinton urging “the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power”, by military force if necessary in order to protect: “… our vital interests in the Gulf.” Clinton, running along more Fabian lines did not like to be pressured by anyone, least of all the Zio-Cons who were commonly known by lower level CIA personnel as the “Crazies.” Nevertheless, these signatories which included Abrams, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, and U.N. ambassador John Bolton went on to become the main backers of the 2003 genocide in Iraq and their dreams of conquest. [9]

A few days after the 9/11 attacks, a PNAC letter pressured President Bush to extend the parameters of engagement regarding the War on Terror by including Saddam Hussein and Lebanon’s Hezbollah. The need to encompass any and all – even if entirely unconnected – was a driving force in the minds of PNAC members. So, too were the groups true colours revealed in relation to the prevalence of Zionism and its agents. In an April 2002 letter to Bush on Israel, Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority (PA) were deemed “a cog in the machine of Middle East terrorism,” and that America must therefore end support for not only the PA but the Israeli-Palestinian peace process itself. And peace is the last thing Zio-Conservatism wishes to see, being counter to the policy of perpetual war and the theocracy of Zionist visions.  PNAC members wrote that: “Israel’s fight against terrorism is our fight,” calling for Bush to “accelerate plans for removing Saddam Hussein from power.” [10]

Though The Project for a New American Century hung up its armchair warmongering in 2006 in part due to bad press, it was unlikely that Neo-Con hawks would simply fade into the background. True to form, Son of PNAC made its debut in 2009 yawningly named The Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI) founded by the same Straussians William Kristol, Robert Kagan and former Bush minion Don Senor. Unbelievably, the faintest whisper of humility and caution was notably absent when it sponsored a conference pushing for a U.S. “surge” in Afghanistan and a greater involvement of the US military in the country. As reporters Daniel Luban and Jim Lobe write: “… the formation of FPI may be a sign that its founders hope once again to incubate a more aggressive foreign policy during their exile from the White House, in preparation for the next time they return to political power.” [11]

George_Obama1

Bush-Obama two sides of the same puppet Image credit /Source: mistahboombastic.blogspot.com

They have never left however. A May 2010 report (PDF) from the a Washington, DC think tank, Brookings Institute state quite clearly that Neo-Conservatives such as former Assistant Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Irving Kristol’s son Bill Kristol and writer and former politician Richard Perle are working their (black) magic within the Obama Administration.

Keep in mind that just because a fusion between certain elements of the Three Establishment Model (3EM) defined the 1990s and early 2000s does not mean the pathology behind it has suddenly been replaced. Obviously, no such redemption was forthcoming since Obama-Biden administration has brought with it the same strains of pathology with even more disasterous results. That ideological baton has merely been passed to the Liberal Establishment who have exactly the same objectives of globalism as the Conservatives and Zionist arms, they just differ in the means to get there. Once again, what is at stake here is the choice, not between different parties or ideologies – that is an illusion – but the choice between a world locked into a perpetual high-level psychopathy that normalises greed, hatred and destruction to erode the human spirit, or the clawing back of a state of equilibrium where such extreme negativity is called out for what it is – evil. As the US police state gains momentum it seems that they are, once again, a step closer to their ideal.

For the PNAC and FPI teams the September 11th Attacks were so well timed it was miraculous.

The question is, do you believe in miracles?

 


Notes

[1] ‘Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush’. By Ron Suskind, The New York Times Magazine.October 17 2004.
[2] Sun Tzu, The Art of War, Ch. VII.
[3] Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor By Robert Stinnett. Published by The Free Press, First Edition, 1999. ISBN-10: 0684853396.
[4] http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm
[5] ‘Leo Strauss and the World of Intelligence’(by Which We Do Not Mean Nous) by Gary J. Schmitt and Abram N. Shulsky 1999.
[6] ‘Leo Strauss’ Philosophy of Deception’ By Jim Lobe AlterNet, May 18, 2003. | Leo Strauss and the American Right by Shadia B. Drury, 1999. Published by Palgrave MacMillan ISBN-10: 0312217838.
[7] PNAC, Rebuilding America’s Defenses ( p.51) | Ibid. (p.53)
[8] Continuity of Government: Current Federal Arrangements and the Future Harold C. Relyea Specialist in American National Government Government and Finance Division: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/RS21089.pdf
[9] PNAC Letter to President Clinton on Iraq, January 26, 1998 -www.newamericancentury.org/lettersstatements.htm
[10] PNAC Letter to President Bush on Israel, Arafat and the War on Terrorism, April 3, 2002. http://www.newamericancentury.org/lettersstatements.htm
[11] ‘Neo-Con Ideologues Launch New Foreign Policy Group’ By Jim Lobe and Daniel Luban, Inter Press Service News Agency http://www.ips.net

Flight 93 and Shanksville (2)


 “Ultimately, what actually happened to Flight 93 – missile, bomb, passenger heroes, etc. – is not fundamentally significant to the question of government complicity in 9/11. Ultimately, what is most compelling, is the fact that the government lied. The airplane was allowed to fly around our airspace for almost two full hours after the onset of the attacks. Why? And why have we been told some absurd narrative of switched off transponders, lost aircraft, and military confusion? Why were we told the airplane crashed into a field because of the actions of a few ‘heroes’ when all available evidence points to a much simpler explanation? Why the lies? Why the convoluted fabrications? Why the lack of accountability? Clearly the truth about Flight 93 reveals something the government wants covered up. The task of pulling off those covers is ours.”

- www.911hardfacts.com


Continuing the exploration of Flight 93 and the events which led to its crash or, its shooting down. (See previous post).


 

united93

Promotional material for the movie “United 93″ (2006) directed by Paul Greengrass. Catchline: September 2001: “Four planes were hijacked. Three of them reached their target. This is the story of the fourth.”

The Tragedy of United Airlines flight 93 received the inevitable Hollywood treatment. As a standard pop-corn entertainment it was reasonable fare. As an accurate representation of what occurred during that day, it was an appalling piece of propaganda.

At 9:57 one of the hijackers was heard saying that there was fighting outside the cockpit. A voice from outside said: ‘Let’s get them.’

It was one minute later that Todd Beamer was alleged to have ended his call while another passenger was saying to her husband: “I think they’re going to do it. They’re forcing their way into the cockpit … and a short time later: “They’re doing it! They’re doing it! They’re doing it!” However, this was closely followed somewhat chillingly by screaming in the background accompanied by a “whooshing sound, a sound like wind” then more screaming, after which he lost contact.” [1]

According to the San Francisco Chronicle: “The silence last[s] two minutes, then there [is] screaming. More silence, followed by more screams. Finally, there [is] a mechanical sound, followed by nothing.” Another chronicler reports that: “Near the end of the cockpit voice recording, loud wind sounds can be heard.” [2] While The Philadelphia Daily News observes that: “[R]elatives of Flight 93 passengers who heard the cockpit tape … said government officials laid out a timetable for the crash in a briefing and in a transcript that accompanied the recording. Relatives later reported they heard sounds of an on-board struggle beginning at 9:58 a.m., but there was a final ‘rushing sound’ at 10:03, and the tape fell silent.” [3] The “rushing sound” could have indicated a de-pressurisation occurred, or as journalist Paul Thompson suggested, following the sound of wind as last thing to be heard on the cock pit recorder because “the plane had been holed.” [4]

There are various differing accounts regarding jet fighters in the vicinity of Flight 93. Two days after the 9/11 attacks an unnamed New England air traffic controller ignored a ban on controllers speaking to the media, saying that an F-16 fighter closely pursued Flight 93 and made a 360-degree turn to remain close to the commercial jet. He added that the fighter pilot “must’ve seen the whole thing.” Assuming of course, what the nature of his mission was. [5]

F-16-911F16 Fighter Jet

Almost a week after September 11th CBS News reported that two F-16s tailed Flight 93 and were within 60 miles of it when it went down. Witnesses on the ground claimed to have seen and heard a fighter plane in the area. The UK’s Independent reported that: “At least half a dozen named individuals…have reported seeing a second plane flying low…over the crash site within minutes of the United Flight crashing. They describe the plane as a small, white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings. The FBI are happy with the idea of it being a Fairchild Falcon business jet yet do not explain why it was there when airspace was restricted. [6] Others disagreed, including witness Jim Bryant who thought: “It reminded [him] of a fighter jet,” and workers Dennis Decker, and Rick Chaney who were located about a mile north of the crash site and heard an explosion. They ran outside and saw a large mushroom cloud spreading over the ridge. As soon as they looked up they: “…saw a midsized jet flying low and fast,” where: “It appeared to make a loop or part of a circle, and then it turned fast and headed out.” [7]

Witness Susan McElwain also disagreed with the FBI, stating:

“There’s no way I imagined this plane – it was so low it was virtually on top of me. It was white with no markings but it was definitely military, it just had that look. It had two rear engines, a big fin on the back like a spoiler on the back of a car and with two upright fins at the side. I haven’t found one like it on the internet. It definitely wasn’t one of those executive jets. The FBI came and talked to me and said there was no plane around. Then they changed their story and tried to say it was a plane taking pictures of the crash 3,000ft up. [8]

Further evidence that Flight 93 was shot down includes many reports on the debris which was scattered over an eight miles radius and indicated a breakup of the aeroplane prior to impact and in line with a missile attack. Further support for this comes from the bizarre evidence that there seems to be nothing left at all at the actual crash site on the periphery of the town of Shanksville, except for one half-ton piece of engine found over a mile away prior to “burning debris falling from the sky.” [10] According to one report this is consistent with effects of “the heat-seeking, air-to-air Sidewinder missiles aboard an F-16 [which] would likely target one of the Boeing 757’s two large engines.” [11]

Even though both the FBI and NORAD have said the aircraft was not shot down, there scores of witness statements which point to Flight 93 being downed by a missile. Though there are many witnesses who report hearing strange noises and flying erratically. There are also witnesses who say that Flight 93 in its final descent did not show any indications of having been hit by a missile because there were “no pieces flying” and that it was “intact.” However, commercial passenger planes hit by missiles continue to fly erratically for several minutes before crashing. An example is Korean Airliner 747 which was hit by two Russian missiles in 1983, yet continued to fly for two more minutes. [12] Debris can also descend after an initial strike some distance away. The debris would drop but not necessarily the whole plane instantaneously.

Witness Kelly Laura Temyer did not see the plane but heard its engine which she described as: “… a loud thump that echoed off the hills …” She heard two more “loud thumps” and then nothing more. Temyer was also told the same thing by “… people she knows in state law enforcement” namely, that: “… the plane was shot down and that decompression sucked objects from the aircraft, explaining why there was a wide debris field.” [13]

77 year-old World War II veteran and Mayor of Shanksville Ernie Stuhl told Philadelphia Daily News that he knew: “…of two people – I will not mention names – that heard a missile. They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards … This one fellow served in Vietnam and he says he’s heard them, and he heard one that day.” [14] One of those individuals may have been Joe Wilt: “… who lives a quarter-mile from the crash site” and who remembers hearing “‘whistling like a missile, then a loud boom.” … “The first thing I thought it was, was a missile.” [15]

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported that the Residents outside Shanksville discovered “… clothing, books, papers, and what appeared to be human remains. Some residents said they collected bags-full of items to be turned over to investigators. Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly six miles from the immediate crash scene. Workers at Indian Lake Marina said that they saw a cloud of confetti-like debris descend on the lake and nearby farms minutes after hearing the explosion…” [16]

However, as John Carlin of the Independent accurately said, so much of the events and confusion surrounding Flight 93 is speculation. There is very little information from which we can make concrete conclusions. He states: “… unless the US government reveals more of what it knows, provides a detailed account of the last 10 minutes in the life of Flight 93 and the 44 people who were aboard, there will not only be scope but sound reasons for the conspiracy theorists to continue to speculate as to what really happened in those last few minutes before the plane plunged into the earth; to cast doubts on the soft-focus legend that the traumatised American public has seized upon so gratefully.” [17]

 debrisfieldsImage Source: http://www.911research.wtc7.net/

Nevertheless, while that may be true for much of Flight 93, when a bird’s-eye view is adopted over the 9/11 attacks as a whole, a definite picture of collusion and treason comes into focus, not least when we cast an eye back to the morning of September 11th and replay some of the reports from then President George W. Bush and his Vice President Dick Cheney, who stated: “Well, I discussed it with the president. Are we prepared to order our aircraft to shoot down these airliners that have been hijacked? He said yes… I–it was my advice. It was his decision.” And how did Bush feel about that decision? He stated: “That’s a sobering moment, to order your own combat aircraft to shoot down your own civilian aircraft. But it was an easy decision to make, given the – given the fact that we had learned that a commercial aircraft was being used as a weapon. I say easy decision. It was – I didn’t hesitate; let me put it to you that way. I knew what had to be done.” [18]

Though accounts differ on the timing and identity of the plane, when fighters were finally given the order to shoot down aeroplanes under the control of hijackers at 9:56am a military aide had thereafter said to Vice President Cheney: “There is a plane 80 miles out. There is a fighter in the area. Should we engage?” Cheney responded “Yes” after which an F-16 went in pursuit of Flight 93. It was also reported that as the fighter got nearer to flight 93, Cheney was asked twice to confirm that the fighter should engage, which Cheney did…Furthermore, when President Bush was told of the crash of Flight 93 at 10:08, he reportedly asked: ‘Did we shoot it town or did it crash?’ ” [9]

You can hear what Cheney has to say for himself in a 2011 interview on the subject:

 

Either way, Cheney is nicely covered and acting out the role as elder statesman doing his god-fearing duty for the American public. He states: “If we had been in a position to intercept one of those, to keep it from striking its target; would we have done it? Absolutely, and what I did was pass on the President’s approval of the basic proposition we would in fact authorise our people to shoot down aircraft that had been hijacked and had refused to divert …”  Very nice dick. Nonetheless, all the evidence points to the fact light 93 was shot down though very probably outside of the official chain of command as were most of the choreographed events of the day, at least those that were within shadow government control. Whether Cheney was aware of that particular nugget of information we will probably never know.

Donald Rumsfeld unwittingly opened his big mouth once more in a televised speech in which he underscored the remarks of his colleagues when he spoke to US soldiers in Mosul, Iraq in 2004: “And I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon…” [19]

D.Rumsfeld-flight93

Donald Rumsfeld: Like most garden-variety psychopaths they can’t help revealing their lies

On National Public Radio (NPR), anchorman Robert Siegel acknowledged the gaff while attempting to carry on with “business as usual”: “The people who shot down the plane over Pennsylvania.” He was presumably speaking of United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, on 9/11. No US official has ever credited theories that the plane was shot down. We’ve been unable to get clarification from the Pentagon.” [20]

By 2008, another confirmation that Flight 93 was shot down came from a National Security Agency source bringing the total to three independent testimonies from within NSA. Intelligence analyst and journalist Wayne Madsen:

“An F-16 scrambled from Langley Air Force Base in Virginia returned to base minus one air-to-air missile but the National Security Agency CRITIC report specified the interceptors that downed United 93 took off from Andrews.[…] a number of personnel who were on watch at the Meade Operations Center (MOC) [at the NSA] … were aware that United 93 was brought down by an Air Force air-to-air missile. Personnel within both the MOC and NSOC have reported the doomed aircraft was shot down.” [21]

The official version from the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks was much more in keeping with the “they hate us for our freedoms” script and which the government wanted the public to so desperately accept: “The airplane rolled onto its back, and one of the hijackers began shouting, ‘Allah is the Greatest’. With the sounds of the passenger counter-attack continuing, the aircraft plowed into an empty field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, at 580 miles per hour….” [22]

Interestingly, a Muslim member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, Muhammad Columbo has said that “Allah akbar! Allah akbar!” Translated as “God is great! God is great!” was entirely incorrect. They would never have said this. Columbo explained: “The last words of a Muslim cannot be these! They are used in the call to prayer or in an attack at war. On the moment of death, a Muslim must confirm that ‘There is but one God, Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet!’ This means that someone was either not an Arab-Muslim hijacker or those writing this particular script made a bit of a blunder. [23]

Perhaps the most mysterious presence of a cover-up akin to the attempts to suggest a Boeing 757 crashed at the Pentagon is the alleged resting place of Flight 93. Many researchers have highlighted significant problems with the crash site, one of which is the apparent absence of the plane itself. The Boeing 757, heavily laden with jet fuel hit the ground at 575 mph spinning 180 degrees landing upside in a coal strip-mine, sending out a fireball across a nearby forest, setting alight many trees. According to a press report from The Age: “The fuselage burrowed straight into the earth so forcefully that one of the ‘black boxes’ was recovered at a depth of 25 feet under the ground.” The 9/11 Commission gives an outline of the Flight 93’s impact trajectory in which: “The airplane headed down; the control wheel was turned hard to the right. The airplane rolled onto its back …” hitting the ground at around 10:03 am 125 miles from Washington, D.C.

The coroner Wallace Miller who was one of the first on the scene of the 20 acre plot of land, recounted how all 33 passengers, seven crew and four hijackers had essentially been “cremated” upon impact with only 8 percent of the total found. He was also: “…stunned at how small the smoking crater looked … ‘like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it.’”

The 757 was allegedly swallowed up by the sheer force of the impact and the type of spongy, limestone soil which allowed deep penetration until hitting rock 23 metres down. According to one report: “It was as if a marble had been dropped into water,” with: “… so-called black boxes … excavated [at] fifteen feet into the crater and the cockpit voice recorder at twenty-five feet.” [24] Wallace Miller said: “I’ve seen a lot of highway fatalities where there’s fragmentation,”… “The interesting thing about this particular case is that I haven’t, to this day, 11 months later, seen any single drop of blood. Not a drop.” [25] Quite apart from the fact that subsequent studies of the crash site by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have also confirmed that there was no residue from the jet fuel that would have been spread across the length and breadth of the crash site had a Boeing 757 actually crashed there.

The only excavation team to work with the FBI was J & J Svonavec Excavating, headed by Jim Svonavec and his wife Sally and son Jamie who “…refused all previous requests for interviews” due to the fact: “they wanted to tell their story to a Catholic publication” and were apparently (and conveniently) “Men of few words.” Sally Svonavec: “… remembers Jamie phoning them from the site and saying: “There is no plane there, believe me.’” But this is because: “the ground had swallowed up much of the wreckage,” the apparently logical reason being that the plane: “…went in the ground so fast it didn’t have a chance to burn,” while the cock-pit section broke off and hurled itself into the woods shattering into many little bits. [26]

Following on from this curious description of an excavation team working so closely with the FBI, Shanksville’s “Ambassadors” at the annual memorial of Flight 93 “… have participated in rigorous educational training to become familiar with details of Flight 93 and the passengers and crew members to inform visitors about what happened here on 9/11.” They have been busy telling visitors that more than 80 percent of this aircraft was buried underground. That’s quite a feat. It would mean more than 51 tons of a Boeing 757 managed to be sucked into what is shaping up to be a magnetic vortex of enormous power. Before this took place however, the velocity of that impact managed to send debris spiralling off into space to land eight miles away from the crash scene. More than a little odd for an aircraft that allegedly nosedived into the ground.

Shanksville-crash1

Does that look like the crash site of a Boeing 747 jet airliner?

CNN news anchor Daryn Kagan spoke to correspondent Brian Cabell reporting from the supposed Shankville crash site on September 13, 2001. The “breaking news” supports the evidence that Flight 93 did not crash but was shot down:

CABELL: Well, Daryn, in the last hour or so, the FBI and the state police here have confirmed that have they cordoned off a second area about six to eight miles away from the crater here where plane went down. This is apparently another debris site, which raises a number of questions. Why would debris from the plane — and they identified it specifically as being from this plane — why would debris be located 6 miles away. Could it have blown that far away. It seems highly unlikely. Almost all the debris found at this site is within 100 yards, 200 yards, so it raises some question. We don’t want to over speculate of course. But there were some cell phone callers, one cell phone caller in particular, who said saw a bomb, or something that looked like a bomb with one of the hijackers. Also, the man who took over the plane apparently announced at one point, he had –there was a
bomb on board the plane. Again, we don’t want to speculate, we don’t want to jump to conclusions. But what we do know is that there’s a site about half mile behind me, where the plane went down, where most of the debris is, and then about six miles away up by a lake, there is another area that’s been cordoned off, and state police and the FBI have said definitely there is debris from the plane located there. […]

KAGAN: […] WE don’t want to speculate about this large debris field. But it seems to me from covering a number of plane crashes on the scene, that if nothing else, this is not typical for a plane crash to be spread across an area this large.

CABELL: It’s certainly doesn’t make sense, because most of the debris has been found in a very compact area, within 100 yards, 200 yards, maybe a little bit beyond that. Then all of a sudden they’re telling us six miles away, they have another concentration of debris, very small pieces. Most peoples here no bigger than the size of briefcase. The debris six miles away may be smaller. We have talked to a number of individuals here. They say they have talked to people who saw this plane during the final moments. They haven’t confirmed whether they saw — whether they talked to anybody who saw this plane actually land, or crash rather, and as to whether it broke up on the way, we don’t know that. The FBI being very tight-lipped about that. But again, it leads to that possibility. It certainly leads to a number of questions.” [27] [Emphasis mine]

There is also the issue of registration details and evidence confirming the crash remains are that of UA Flight 93. The FBI has yet to do so. Federal authorities reported that the flight was a Boeing 757-222 with a registration number N591UA.

Yet, as retired Colonel George Nelson (USAF) explains:

“If an aircraft crash caused the hole in the ground, there would have literally hundreds of serially-controlled time-change parts within the hole that would have proved beyond any shadow of doubt the precise tail-number or identity of the aircraft. However, the government has not produced any hard evidence that would prove beyond a doubt that the specifically alleged aircraft crashed at that site. On the contrary, it has been reported that the aircraft, registry number N591UA, is still in operation.” [28]

Ariel photos of the crash site in a Pennsylvania farm field were made available to the public in 2001 showing a hole in the ground gently smouldering. Perhaps the reasons that fighter pilots were given authorisation to shoot down hijacked airplanes after Flight 93 was the only one left in the sky, and given that the passengers were successfully taking control of the plane away from the hijackers meant that the aircraft was in danger of being landed safely. Hijackers would have been interrogated; passengers debriefed leading to a widespread media interest that would have very possibly led to the unravelling of the official story from WTC to the Pentagon and beyond.

P200058_1united93_governmentphotoThese are government exhibit photos. They are designed to show us that a Jumbo jet crash-landed at this spot. We are also told that the reason there is no debris, wings, engine or any sign at all that an aircraft landed there, is due to the whole plane was sucked into the soft earth. It is a return to their tried and tested formula used in Flight 77 which we are told was both sucked into a 18 ft. and vapourised at the same time. Why break a winning formula?

shankscrater

FEMA personnel offering a fine impression of forensic examination of the “crash site.”

And here we have some photos of real crash sites:

crashes1Source: infrakshun

Instead of photos showing evidence of Flight 93’s final resting place (which was actually scattered of a radius of eight miles) this is more likely to be a hastily created site by FEMA. Take a look at these photos of ordinance explosions. The central image is by Val McClatchey titled: “End of Serenity” and was used in most of the mainstream media in the hope that most people would believe that this was the smoke plume rising from the crash. The other images are are various ordinance explosions from around the world. Now, does this look like the smoke plume from the aftermath of a Boeing jumbo jet airliner which has just impacted the ground, producing a raging fire-ball of jet-fuel, or does it look like your ordinary ordinance explosion?

shanksville-flight93-explosion

With PSYOPS worshipper Karl Rove and his Executive Director Philip D. Zelikow overseeing the 9/11 Commission, they made sure not to interview the on-duty signals intelligence personnel who were aware that United Flight 93 was brought down by Air Force jets. [29] Though the passengers very probably did struggle with hijackers, the cover-story came in to suggest that they flew the plane into the ground as a sacrifice. The 8-mile debris appears to show that this story is part of a hoax with the probable involvement and careful planning from factions in the US military which extended across all aspects of the 9/11 attacks. If anything, Flight 93 proved that such planning had glitches in its execution. Such is the nature of psychopaths in power – their worst enemy is over confidence and the inability to foresee the natural manifestation of unpredictability which can overturn even the best laid plans.

With Flight 93 and every facet of the September 11th attacks the official story is problematic. An entire book on Flight 93 alone could be filled with troubling questions which have yet to be answered by the relevant authorities. This series has barely touched the surface of contradictory, fallacious and unsatisfactory explanations tossed the public’s way from US federal agencies like stale scraps from a bountiful table. The answers are most certainly there. It is in the best interests of  readers to do their own research and network with others to bring the facts into the light of day.

 


Notes

[1] Ibid.
[2] ‘Bound by fate, determination / The final hours of the passengers aboard S.F.-bound Flight 93’ by Jaxon Van Derbeken, San Francisco Chronicle, September 17, 2001.| Among the Heroes: United Flight 93 and the Passengers and Crew Who Fought Back by Jere Longman, HarperCollins 2002, (pp. 270-271).
[3] op. cit. Bunch.
[4] ‘What Happened to Flight 93?’ by Richard Wallace Daily Mirror, September 12, 2002.
[5] ‘As attacks unfolded, FAA was left guessing’ By Albert McKeon, The Telegraph, September 11, 2011. | ‘FAA employee: Hijacked jets almost collided’ USA Today, September 14, 2001.
[6] ‘Unanswered Questions: The Mystery of Flight 93’ By John Carlin, Independent, 13 August 2002.
[7] ‘NYC Photos, Flight 93 Witnesses Identify 9/11 White Jet by From Jon Carlson, rense.com, http://rense.com/general64/white.htm
[8] op. cit. Wallace.
[9] op. cit. Griffin (p.51)
[10] op. cit. Carlin.
[11] op. cit. Bunch.
[12] ‘CVR transcript from Korean Air Flight 007 August 31, 1983’ August 31, 1983. Via http://www.historycommons.org
[13] ‘We know it crashed, but not why’ – FBI is silent, fueling “shot down” rumors By William Bunch, Philadelphia Daily News, November 15, 2001.
[14] Ibid.
[15] ‘Frantic 911 call preceded crash outside Pittsburgh’ By Anne Michaud, The Boston Globe, September 12, 2001.
[16] ‘Investigators locate ‘black box’ from Flight 93; widen search area in Somerset crash’ By Tom Gibb, James O’Toole and Cindi Lash, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Staff Writers, September 13, 2001.
[17] op. cit. Carlin.
[18] Vice President Dick Cheney, CBS News September 11, 2001.| President George W. Bush, CBS News September 11, 2001.
[19] Donald Rumsfeld, speech to US troops in Mosul, Iraq, December 24, 2004. The speech was broadcast by CNN. For complete transcript of Rumsfeld’s speech see also: Slip of the tongue? Rumsfeld admits that “Flight 93″ was shot down’ VIDEO Footage and transcripts By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, May 12, 2007. [text revised on May 14, 2007]
[20] National Public Radio (NPR), All Things Considered 8:00 PM EST NPR, Donald Rumsfeld’s surprise visits to US troops in Iraq, December 24, 2004, Anchor: Robert Siegel.
[21] ‘Third NSA Source Confirms: Flight 93 Shot Down By Air Force Jet’ By Wayne Madsen, April 20, 2008, http://www.opednews.com
[22] National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, July 2004, Chapter 1,www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf
[23] ‘The 9/11 Passenger Paradox: What happened to Flight 93?’ by Dean Hartwell (with Jim Fetzer) March 12 2012. http://www.veterans today.com
[24] op. cit. Longman.
[25] ‘Hallowed Ground’ The Age, September 9, 2002.
[26] ‘Sacred Ground in Pennsylvania’ By Mary Jo Dangel, http://www.americancatholic.org/
[27] ‘America Under Attack: FBI and State Police Cordon Off Debris Area Six to Eight Miles from Crater Where Plane Went Down’ CNN Transcript September 13 2001.
[28] ‘Aircraft Parts and the Precautionary Principle – Impossible to Prove a Falsehood True: Aircraft Parts as a Positive Clue to Aircraft Identity’ by George Nelson Colonel, USAF (ret.) 2003. http://www.physics911.et
[29] op. cit. Madsen.

Flight 93 and Shanksville (1)


Are you ready guys? Let’s roll.”

- passenger of Todd Beamer, United Airlines Flight 93

The official story for United Airlines Flight 93 was that on September 11th 2001, on a scheduled flight from Newark to San Francisco the plane crashed into a field in Shanksville Pennsylvania, after passengers and crew overpowered Al-Qaeda terrorists and prevented the plane reaching its targeted destination of Washington D.C. All 38 passengers, five flight attendants, two pilots and four hijackers were killed.

True to all the other gaping holes in the official theory, Flight 93 proved no different. Two main problems that quickly became apparent. Firstly, the debris from the Boeing 757-222’s remains were spread over such a large area to indicate that this was not a crash clear evidence that Flight 93 had been shot down. Eyewitness reports seemed to confirm this possibility with sightings of a fighter jet prior to and immediately after the event.

At 8:42am United Airlines Flight 93 took off from Newark International Airport, 41 minutes late. Between 9:16 am and 9:20 am the FAA informed NORAD that flight 93 may have been hijacked, with fighters scrambled. By 9:30 am, Flight 93’s transponder signal ceased and five minutes later it had begun flying in an entirely different direction towards the Capitol. It was at this time that General Haugen reported that: “A person came on the radio, and identified themselves as being with the Secret Service and he said, ‘I want you to protect the White House at all costs.’ [1] At 9:58 am passenger Todd Beamer’s last call terminated and the fight between passengers and hijackers is said to have begun. By 10:06 am Flight 93 had crashed near Shanksville, 124 miles from Washington D.C. [2]

United Airlines Flight 93

United Airlines Flight 93

The 9/11 Commission Report gave an extensive account of the hijackers’ movements inside all the planes on September 11th based on cell and air phone conversations between passengers and their partners and family members. The 9/11 Commission’s Report provides a vivid, almost Hollywood-esque descriptions of the evil Arabs going about their business, depicting the drama of the passengers’ conversations in juxtaposition to the knives and box-cutter wielding Allah-worshippers and building the evidence accordingly.[3]

810px-UA93_path.svg

UA 93’s flight path on September 11, 2001, from Newark, New Jersey, to Stonycreek Township, Pennsylvania. | 9/11 Commission (updated 2011 (wikipedia)

As we explored in relation to Flight 77, the notion that cell phone use was as easy as calling a friend down the street is untenable. The technology at that time was not available to allow passengers to make a wireless cell phone call from aircrafts travelling at high speed above 8,000 feet. The wireless industry was also surprised on hearing the ease to which cell phone calls had been made on all flights, viewing the 9/11 Commission descriptions and findings as a “fluke” that calls were able to function at such high altitudes, though at lower levels a certain degree of functionality could be maintained “for a little while” especially if “close to the ground” which of course, they were not. [4] In fact, according to those working in the cellphone industry: “Once above 10,000 feet, however, calls rarely get through, if ever.” One experienced airline pilot agrees: “The idea of being able to use a cellphone while flying is completely impractical. Once through about 10,000 feet, the thing is useless, since you are too high and moving too fast for the phone to provide a signal.” [5]

The credibility of the Commission Report took a further hammering when American Airlines and Qualcomm, a wireless technology company announced in July 2004 that: “Travelers could be talking on their personal cellphones as early as 2006. Earlier this month, American Airlines conducted a trial run on a modified aircraft that permitted cell phone calls.” [6] Gosh really? Here we were thinking that detailed and clear calls were possible back in 2001. After all, a whole official conspiracy theory has been built on it…

According to the time-lines, flight transponder and cell phone call data, United Airlines Flight 175 calls had to been received from an altitude between 25–30,000 ft; whilst before the transponder was turned off at 8:56 am, American Airlines Flight 77 calls would have to come from an altitude that was higher but no lower than 7,000 ft. The 9/11 Commission Report confirmed that on United Airlines Flight 93 passengers began calling their loved ones with cell and air phones just after 9.32am, four minutes after the Report’s confirmation of the plane’s attitude of 35,000 feet. [7]

flight93banner

Flight 93 Commemorative banner Source: History Channel

Two of the longest calls from Flight 93 which were subsequently milked to support the official story were from Edward Felt and Todd Beamer on an airfone. The latter was transferred to a Verizon supervisor Lisa Jefferson who engaged Beamer in conversation from 9:45 ending his call at 9.58 am “… before saying that the passengers planned ‘to jump’ the hijacker in the back of the plane, then uttered his famous words: ‘Are you ready guys? Let’s roll.’” This was followed at just after 9:47, with another alleged caller Jeremy Glick telling his wife that all the men had decided to attack the hijackers. His last words from his final call at 9:54: “I know we’re all going to die. There’s three of us who are going to do something about it.” [8]

There are several problems with the Beamer story.

Explaining details about the hijacking, describing his family and punctuated by information from a flight attendant who was apparently sitting next to him, Beamer then asks Jefferson to recite the Lord’s Prayer with him, followed by Psalm 23. Given that the length of the conversation at an uninterrupted 13 minutes is incredible in itself, air phones were not available on Boeing 757s in 2001. His wife Lisa Beamer states that Jefferson had told her: “… it was a miracle that Todd’s call hadn’t been disconnected,” and further: “Because of the enormous number of calls that day, the GTE systems overloaded and lines were being disconnected all around her as she sat at the operator’s station outside of Chicago, talking to Todd. [Jefferson] kept thinking, this call is going to get dropped! Yet Todd stayed connected … all the way to the end.” [9]

Beamer stated: “I know we’re not going to make it out of here …” which makes it even more confusing as to why he would refuse offers to be put through to his wife during such an extraordinary “lucky” and long telephone conversation. Why waste time reading out Psalms when you could have spoken to your wife which in all likelihood you would not see again? The reason given, according to Jefferson was that: “… he did not want to upset her as they were expecting their third child in January.” [10]

Todd Beamer

Todd Beamer

This makes little sense either. If the evidence from the trial of alleged hijacker Zacharias Moussaoui is correct, Beamer tried telephoning his wife three times before 9:44 am with conflicting accounts from when and from which device he tried calling from. Why would he do that if he was so concerned about protecting her feelings? What about all his other family members? Were they off limits too? What we can be sure of is if a family member had spoken to the person claiming to be Todd Beamer on the end of that miracle phone line perhaps they would have known it wasn’t him. It seems a total stranger was enough for the last call Beamer would make in which he would sign off with a call to arms of “let’s roll.” Indeed, it seems that phrase became another tool of Bush propaganda on a par with “Bring ‘em on” which spawned a new wave of chest beating patriotism “ as journalist Peter Perl indicated, where the phrase became: “… emblazoned on Air Force fighter planes, city firetrucks, school athletic jerseys, and countless T-shirts, baseball caps and souvenir buttons. It’s also commemorated in popular songs.” [11]

As 9/11 journalist Ted Rall commented in his article of March 2006:

“The legend of Flight 93 had everything a nation caught with its pants down needed to feel better about itself: guts, heroism, self-sacrifice. Best of all, it was marketable–by Hollywood and by a president willing to surf on a kind of heroism notably absent from his own life. … Lisa Beamer, widow of the passenger credited with the call-to-arms “let’s roll,” wrote a bestselling book by the same name, applied for a trademark on the expression, and is now working the Christianist lecture circuit.” [12]

The  next anomaly is concerned with the timing of the calls and the presumed timing of the crash itself. According to 9/11 Commission Report’s own data Todd Beamer’s last call on United Airlines Flight 93 could not have happened when it purportedly did because two of Beamers calls are listed as occurring at the exact same time. [13] A summary of the passenger phone calls presented at the 2006 trial of Zacharias Moussaoui, Beamer’s call lasts for “3,925 seconds.” [14] As it began just before 9:44 am, this would mean the call had to have finished at about 10:49 a.m. If the Flight 93 reportedly crashed at 10:03 am then something is amiss. Moreover, if one peruses Beamer’s cell phone records throughout the day and night of September 11th 2001, numerous calls continue after the purported crash as late as 20.58. [15]

After whoever it was called “Todd Beamer” signed off from his 13 minute conversation, Lisa Jefferson tells us:

“After he said, ‘Let’s roll,’ he left the phone, and I would assume that’s at the point that they went to charge the cockpit. And I was still on the line and the plane took a dive, and by then, it just went silent. I held on until after the plane crashed–probably about 15 minutes longer and I never heard a crash–it just went silent because–I can’t explain it. We didn’t lose a connection because there’s a different sound that you use. It’s a squealing sound when you lose a connection. I never lost connection, but it just went silent.” [16]

Zacarias_Moussaoui

Alleged 9/11 hijacker Zacarias Moussaoui

So, now we have a silent crash along with phantom calls. And true to form, the FBI has decided to ignore all requests for clarification, which is about the only consistent theme in the whole 9/11 charade.

Delving superficially into Todd Beamer’s work background provides more questions. One 9/11 researcher found that Larry Ellison, the CEO at the software company Oracle Corporation who has had had ties with intelligence agencies for some considerable time, seemed to have a little more insider knowledge than the rest of us. Even Todd.

On September 13 2001: Larry Ellison sent an email to Oracle employees praising Beamer for his:

“… heroic actions in fighting the terrorists and in stopping the plane from reaching its destination in Washington DC. There was just one problem. No authority from United Airlines or from the government had yet announced to Todd Beamer’s family or to the public that Todd Beamer had been involved in fighting the terrorists. In fact, Lisa Beamer was told by a United Airlines employee in the evening of 9/14/2001 that the FBI had just publicly released information about Todd’s heroics. So Lisa wonders, as we all do, how did Larry Ellison know about Todd’s heroics one day before the FBI released the information to the public?” [17]

During the first week of September 2001, Todd and his wife Lisa Beamer were in Italy enjoying a business trip organised by America’s third richest person and who until recently, was Oracle Corp. CEO Larry Ellison. On the trip was colleague Jonathan Oomrigar, now solution specialist vice president at Oracle,  who: “… worked in one of Oracle’s California offices and was one of Todd Beamer’s favourite Oracle co-workers.” Before the trip to Italy, Jonathan and Todd had travelled together on business to Israel. Calls were made to Oomrigar on the morning of September 11th and important meetings had been scheduled previously in San Francisco, the reason for Todd’s booking on Flight 93. Larry Ellison also owned 70 percent of an Israeli company called Quark Biotech. (Israel’s presence all over various aspects of the 9/11 attacks can be discerned time and time again, as we shall see later on). [18]

oomrigar-Ellison

Jonathan Oomrigar (left) and Larry Ellison (right)

At 9.58am the other caller Mr. Edward Felt managed to make an emergency call (911) from the toilet to John W. Shaw. Felt repeatedly cried “hijack, hijack, hijack”, without describing the hijackers.” He also mentioned that there were “lots of individuals on the plane” and most importantly hearing an explosion and smoke on-board. Shaw was interviewed three times by the FBI on September 11th and again on March 25, 2002.[19] Just eight minutes before the reported time of the crash at 10.06 am, Glenn Cramer, an emergency supervisor who had been monitoring the call confirmed Shaw’s testimony Not only did this call not make it into the 9/11 Commission Report, the tape recording of Felt was confiscated and Mr. Cramer subsequently gagged by the FBI. [20]

edward_felt

Edward Felt

The redacted transcript of Felt’s phone call was released by the FBI which bore no resemblance to Shaw’s and Cramer’s accounts or any mention of an explosion or smoke. [21] After the FBI’s insistence that “Under no circumstance is Newark to provide [the family of] Felt with a copy of the recording or a copy of the transcript” and after a non-disclosure signature had been obtained from Felt’s wife, Sandra Felt, a supervised meeting was allowed to take place where members of the Felt family and Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reporters were permitted to hear cockpit voice recording from Edward Felt on Flight UA93; the only cock-pit voice recorder to have been retrieved from any of the 9/11 flights.

On April 18 2002, in a small conference room at the Princeton hotel they were joined by two FBI agents and a victim-assistance counsellor: “Sitting around a polished wood table, the agents handed each of the Felts a typed transcript of the 911 call, and then played it. Ed’s call was made at 9:58 a.m. [H]e spoke in a quivering voice saying, ‘We are being hijacked. We are being hijacked.’ He went on to describe an “explosion” that he heard, and then white smoke on the plane from an undetermined location. Then the line went dead.” [22] The flight recording also indicates a three-minute gap at 10:03am – between the time the tape goes silent and the time that top scientists have pinpointed for the crash, at 10:06:05 am – but FBI and other agencies have refused repeated requests to explain the discrepancy. [23] It seems there were two versions of the Edward Felt call: one with evidence of an explosion and smoke and a doctored recording, without.

The three key questions that remain unanswered are: Was Flight 93 shot down? If it was, did this happen because the hijackers were imminent danger of crashing it into the White House? Or, was shot it down because the passengers were about to take control and thus present a threat to the whole official conspiracy theory were they allowed to live?

 


Notes

[1] ‘We Have Some Planes,’ Hijacker Told Controller’ By Matthew L. Wald with Kevin Sack, The New York Times, October 16, 2001.
[2] ‘From Take-off to Take Over – Putting it all Together’ Pittsburgh Post Gazette on October 29, 2001.| ‘Officials: Government failed to react to FAA warning’ CNN.com September 17, 2001.
[3] 9/11 Commission Report, Chapter 1, http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf
[4] ‘Final Contact’ By Betsy Harter, November 1, 2001 | http://www.connectedplanetonline.com/wireless/ar/wireless_final_contact/
[5] ‘The Cellphone and Airfone Calls from Flight UA93’ by A. K. Dewdney, 2003. Physics911.net, http://www.physics911.net/cellphoneflight93/
[6] ‘Inflight Cell Phone Use Dies’ By Patty Donmoyer & Jessica Kirshner August 01, 2005 Buisness Travel news. http://www.topics.businesstravelnews.com/business/qualcomm.htm | See also: ‘5th April 2005 AeroMobile™ chooses picocell from ip.access™ for new Inflight Mobile Phone Service’ “The first mobile phone service for passengers on commercial airlines will use miniature cellular technology developed just for inflight operation.”
[7]  http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch1.pdf (p. 7)
[8] Op. cit. Griffin; (p.50)
[9] Let’s Roll!: Ordinary People, Extraordinary Courage. By Lisa Beamer and Ken Abraham, Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 2002, (p. 217).
[10] ‘The Final Moments of United Flight 93’ By Karen Breslau Newsweek MSNBC, Sep. 22, 2001. | Probe reconstructs horror, calculated attacks on planes’ By Glen Johnson, The Boston Globe, November 2, 2001.
[11] ‘Hallowed Ground’ By Peter Perl, Washington Post, May 12, 2002; Page W32.
[12] ‘The Legend of United Flight 93’- by Ted Rall. http://www.911Truth.org, March 8, 2006.
[13] Scholars Call Moussaoui Trail a “Charade” See Constitutional Rights on Trial; Describe Accused as Patsy, Witness tampering, faked evidence, inflammatory testimony display political motives and confirm Charlie Sheen’s concerns, experts claim. Washington, DC (PRWEB) April 22, 2006.
[14] United States v. Zacharias Moussaoui Criminal No. 01-455-A Prosecution Trial Exhibits: www. vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/flights/P200055.html
[15] http://www.intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-09-29-FBI-phone-records.pdf
[16] ‘I Promised I Wouldn’t Hang Up’ – “Lisa Jefferson, the phone supervisor who took Todd Beamer’s call on Flight 93, believes God called her for a purpose.” By Wendy Schumann, June 2006. http://www.belief.net
[17] ‘Let’s Roll: The Todd Beamer Mystery’ | ‘More on Todd Beamer,his timeline on the lead up to 9/11 & his connection to Oracle Corporation’ April 4, 2012, by Stark Naked Truth – http://www.starknakedtruth.blogspot.co.uk
[18] Ibid.
[19]‘Evidence that Ed Felt’s phone call was doctored’ by Elias Davidsson, 20 October 2012, http://www.aldeilis.net/ quoting: FBI Documents 265A-NY-280350-302-3725, 302-38710 and 302-107608 of September 11, 200. | FBI Newark from Pittsburgh Squad 4/JTTF to Counterterrorism, New York, March 26, 2002. Bates ,344. PG 3585.
[20] ‘What Happened to Flight 93’ by Richard Wallace Daily Mirror, 12 September 2002 | ‘Day of Terror: Outside tiny Shanksville, a fourth deadly stroke,’ by Jonathan Silver, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 12, 2001. http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912crashnat2p2.asp
[21] op. cit. Davidsson.
[22] Ibid. Quoting: Steve Levin, “It hurts to listen”, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, April 21, 2002, at http://www.post-gazette.com/nation/20020421flight930421p1.asp
[23] ‘Three-minute discrepancy in tape – Cockpit voice recording ends before Flight 93’s official time of impact’ By William Bunch, Philadelphia Daily News Sep. 16, 2002.

Flight 77 and the Pentagon (2)


“After five years of talking to many individuals in the intelligence community, in the military, foreign intelligence agencies, and a whole host of other people, people from the air traffic control community, the FAA, I came to the conclusion that after five years what we saw happen on that morning of September 11, 2001, was the result of a highly-compartmentalized covert operation to bring about a fascist coup in this country … These people need to be brought to justice, if not by our own Congress, then by an international tribunal in the Hague…”

- Wayne Madsen, Former U.S. Navy Intelligence Officer, specialist in electronic surveillance and security. Formerly assigned to the National Security Agency and the State Department

At 9:37 am September 11, the Pentagon’s ‘War Room’ otherwise known as the Executive Support Centre (ESC) was in session. Torie Clarke, the Assistant Secretary of Defence for public affairs, describes the capabilities of the War room as having: “… instant access to satellite images and intelligence sources peering into every corner of the globe” and where: “… the building’s top leadership goes to coordinate military operations during national emergencies.” That being the case, it is doubly strange that no one realised the Pentagon had been hit, or if they did, nobody stirred. Some of the individuals present included Clarke, Stephen Cambone, Donald Rumsfeld’s closest aide, and Larry Di Rita, Rumsfeld’s personal chief of staff, all of whom decided it was either a bomb or “the heating and cooling systems.” Indeed, Clarke would claim that the first they heard it was a possible “plane” was from Rummie himself half an hour after the attack was heard and while the ESC team were still “glued to television screens showing two hijacked planes destroying the World Trade Center,” (no doubt with pop-corn in hands).

usualsuspects1The Usual Suspects

Rumsfeld decided to arrive at the ESC at 10.15 am after running about the crash scene; getting in the way of rescue teams and interfering with a crime scene. [1] It was also Rumsfeld who first made the executive decision in less than 30 minutes that the Pentagon had been struck by an aeroplane. [2] Like so many of the Bush Administration officials, Torie Clarke followed the Dick Cheney and Condoleezza Rice school of dramatic denial in claiming the notion of a jet airliner attacking was “unfathomable,” when it has been proven beyond doubt that the opposite was the case. [3] As we have seen, the US government had long since created simulations and models to predict what would happen if terrorist flew planes into the White House, The Twin Towers and the Pentagon, including intelligence reports illustrating how “Al-Qaeda could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives … into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House.” [4]

first-response1Donald Rumsfeld “lending a hand” outside the Pentagon

Just one example in an ocean of foreknowledge includes the more peculiar case of Charles Burlingame who in 1990 participated in a department of Defence exercise called “Project MASCA” in which a commercial jet airliner is deployed as a weapon and crashed into the Pentagon. Charles Burlingame was found to be none other than the Captain who supposedly flew Flight 77 into the Pentagon. [5]

In creating distractions to reinforce the official story on 9/11 there are plenty of people on hand to deliver. Though most of the sources for making the link between AA Flight 77 and whatever struck the Pentagon came from military personnel, Ted Olson, Republicrat, U.S. Solicitor General and his wife Neo-Con author Barbara Olson became the designated pillars of truth linking Flight 77 with the Pentagon attack. There were other calls reportedly made by passengers and flight attendants, but Ted Olson was the only person to receive calls from his wife at around 9:25 and 9:30am.

According to a CNN report, Ted Olson maintained that his wife had: “called him twice on a cell phone from American Airlines Flight 77,” further stating that: “all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers. The only weapons she mentioned were knives and cardboard cutters.” [6] This helped to produce the outpourings of indignation and collective revenge surrounding the death of Olson’s wife who had been downed by foaming-at-the-mouth Muslim terrorists, the antithesis of American Christian values. The highbrow “bring ‘em on” philosophy of Bush which seeped into middle town America’s vengeance meant that the “War on Terror” took on new vigour.

barbara-ted-olsonBarbara and Ted Olson

Ted Olson was a faithful supporter of Bush and Neo-Conservatism which right then and there, allows some scepticism about his claims. David Ray Griffin reminds us that he: “… pleaded George W. Bush’s cause before the Supreme Court in the 2000 election dispute” and also: “… defended Vice President Cheney’s attempt to prevent the release of papers from his energy task force to the committee investigating the Enron scandal.” [7] While adoration of the Bush Doctrine isn’t enough to place him under suspicion of lying, the contradictions and constant changes and vagueness in his story certainly are.

The claim that his wife had called him twice from a cell phone via the Department of Justice collect was contradicted on a Hannity and Colmes, Fox News interview on September 14. Olson thought she must have used the aeroplane phone because for some reason her credit cards were inaccessible. This doesn’t work either because a credit card is still needed to activate a passenger-seat phone. [8] No doubt realising he was digging a hole for himself, when giving an interview to American talk show host Larry King, he said that the call went dead because “the signals from cell phones coming from airplanes don’t work that well” which was a huge understatement considering that high-altitude cell phone calls from jet airliners were not possible until 2004. [9] Olson’s statement is contradicted a second time by American Airlines who are on record saying that no Boeing 757s had phones at that time: “The passengers on flight 77 used their own personal cellular phones to make out calls during the terrorist attack.” [10]

Perhaps, Mrs. Olson used her cell phone after all? Taking into account the improbability of such a move given the state of technology, an FBI report at the 2006 trial of alleged hijacker Zacharias Moussaoui added to the weakening of Olson’s story still further by attributing one “unconnected call” to Barbara Olson lasting “o seconds”. According to the FBI report, there was no incoming call from Flight 77 to Ted Olson or anyone else from a cell phone or passenger phone. Why was this total refutation of Ted Olson’s famous “two calls from his wife” not reported?

The nail in the coffin of Ted Olson’s story is the sheer absurdity of the hijack scenario that Ted and Barbara Olson would like us to believe, yet remains a fundamental pillar of the official 9/11 narrative. According to Olson his wife had said that: ‘all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers.’ This is barely credible. 60+ people are hardly likely to be held against their will by 3-4 armed with knives and “box-cutters.” (Actually box-cutters were not allowed on any aircraft from 1994 onwards, so this is another fantasy).  Further, the hijackers had previously been described by the 9/11 Commission as: “… not physically imposing, … the majority of them were between 5’5” and 5’7” in height and slender in build’…” If Charles Burlingame had been aboard as claimed, as a weight-lifter and boxer it is distinctly unlikely he would have suddenly turned into a pussy-cat. His brother also dismissed this scenario who said: “I don’t know what happened in that cockpit, but I’m sure that they would have had to incapacitate him or kill him because he would have done anything to prevent the kind of tragedy that befell that airplane.” [11]

Either Ted Olson was lying or he was a useful idiot. Probably both. The story which he has given to the media doesn’t hold up under any kind of scrutiny though it did provide suitable distraction. But this still leaves us with the burning question:

What was it that hit the Pentagon?

This perhaps:

drone-schmatic

See: Truth and Consequences: A Watershed Moment for Rebuilding a Movement by Scott Creighton | Though the tiny amount of debris that was found does not fit the wreckage profile of a jet airliner by any stretch of the imagination, it certainly conforms to the idea of a drone.

Or even a cruise missile such as this one?

cruisemissile1

During an October 2001 interview U.S. Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld made a revealing remark:

“They [find a lot] and any number of terrorist efforts have been dissuaded, deterred or stopped by good intelligence gathering and good preventative work. It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it’s physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we’re talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building [the Pentagon] and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center. The only way to deal with this problem is by taking the battle to the terrorists, wherever they are, and dealing with them.” [12]

Did Rumsfeld “misspeak”? Was the reference to a missile hitting the Pentagon just an innocent slip of the tongue or did it reveal a deeper truth? If it was truly a jet airliner how could anyone confuse this with a missile unless it is a truth that slipped out unconsciously – a common trait of the psychopath.

Recall that the nose of the Boeing 757 is composed of carbon fibres and thus very fragile. It is physically impossible to suggest that the most fragile part of the aircraft could have piled through three rings of the Pentagon to create a seven-foot exit hole in the inside wall of the third ring. The head of a missile however, would be a much more logical conclusion. The fire produced at the Pentagon shows red flames which are consistent with the type of AGM Maverick, Tomahawk or Russian/Soviet Granit missile which would indicate a hotter and more instantaneous fire. [13]

Short video clips from Pentagon security videos were leaked by an alleged whistleblower in 2002 from which the most pertinent five frames were analysed and pored over, (as it turned out, to little avail) showing something hitting the Pentagon but very likely not a Boeing 757. On May 16th 2006, the U.S. Department of Defence released two more short video clips apparently to placate those calling for the release of all security tapes. Officials declared that these clips show conclusively AA Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon. Once again, there is an explosion but it certainly doesn’t show anything resembling a Boeing 757. What the images do seem to resemble on the so-called crash site is a cruise missile or carrier drone.

pentagonhit1-5

The so-called “leaked” video of a “Boeing 747″ hitting the Pentagon. The smoke and fireball however, looks suspiciously like some variety of tomahawk or stinger missile.

The manoeuvre seen in the security video clips is straight as an arrow and typifies the trajectory and behaviour of a missile, as researcher Peter Wakefield Sault explains:

“The reason it could not be an airplane is that airplanes swoop up and down, always pointing in the direction of flight, unlike cruise missiles which, because they are pilotless, can perform violent maneuvres known as ‘bump up/down’ wherein the attitude of the missile does not change while the missile changes its line of attack. A cruise missile is steered with one or more onboard devices known as ‘Control Moment Gyroscopes’ (CMGs). These control the direction that the missile points in, its attitude, and thereby its course. The wings, which swivel laterally in their entirety, can be used to cause a sudden rapid ascent or descent while the gyroscopes force the missile to maintain the same attitude. This is the maneuvre shown as ‘bump up/down’ … Cruise missiles are designed to hug the ground (or sea) at a height of 6 feet (2 metres) during their final approaches, employing radars and high-speed electronics to achieve this.” [14]

The vapour trail which can be seen in the security camera video clips and stills has also been listed as singular proof of the Aircraft’s presence before slamming into the Pentagon, riding heavily on the power of suggestion, as with most of the 9/11 images. However, jet airliners do not produce vapour trails below 30,000 ft. which must therefore exclude any kind of aeroplane, though the US State Department very much wanted us to believe otherwise.

A cruise missile is propelled by a rocket motor and could be seen if launched from a relatively short-distance from the Pentagon. Though speculative, the Army and Navy Club, less than two miles away is one location where a possible missile trajectory can be traced and which may have served as the missile launch zone. [15] Wakefield-Sault also alerts us to considerable evidence concerning the presence of an aeroplane which passed low and nearby a press conference sometime between 09:31 and 09:38 on the morning of September 11th 2001. Then Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Porter Goss, had convened the conference over three miles North-East of the Pentagon.

According to taxi-driver Lloyde England a large airplane flew very low across State Route 27 taking out five lampposts as it approached the Pentagon, one of which hit Mr. England’s car. According to his testimony on the now defunct website of The Survivors’ Fund Project:

“As [Lloyde] approached the Navy Annex, he saw a plane flying dangerously low overhead. Simultaneously, the plane struck a light pole and the pole came crashing down onto the front of Lloyde’s taxi cab, destroying the windshield in front of his eyes. Glass was everywhere as he tried to stop the car. Another car stopped and the driver helped move the heavy pole off Lloyde’s car. As they were moving the pole, they heard a big boom and turned to see an explosion. The light pole fell on Lloyd and he struggled to get up from underneath, wondering what had happened.” [16]

Given the trajectory of the flight-path it is highly probable that this is the same plane heard at the Porter Goss press conference and does mean that there was not some kind of aircraft approaching the Pentagon. However, the timings are wrong since “… the flight time from the highway to the Pentagon is about one second. Clearly then, if Mr England is correct about the sequence of events, the explosion could not have taken place at the same time that the airplane flew over the Pentagon.” [17]

Furthermore, “…at least half of the “north side flyover” witnesses also claim to have seen the airplane they saw flying over hit the Pentagon, … which is contradicted by the physical evidence of the damage path both inside and outside the Pentagon, hence diminishing their credibility as witnesses to a great big zero.”

lloyd-england-taxiLloyde England’s Taxi which was used to justify the direction and trajectory of the alleged Flight 77. Unfortunately, for the official story, this too is riven with contradictions.

“National Security Alert” a short documentary film made by Citizen Investigation Team claims to have established that witnesses supported a banking north side approach to the Pentagon, with nothing on the South side, “this means the damage to the light-poles and taxi-cab had to have been staged.” The video extract continues: “As unanimously demonstrated by the witnesses, the plane was nowhere near the downed light poles, but it was furthest from light pole no.1 which is what cab-driver Lloyde England claims he lifted out of the windshield of his cab minutes after the attack.” In June of 2008 the CIT confronted England with the information, but before the interview began audio test recording picked up a “strange reaction.” Saying “… he knew that his cab and light pole were on the bridge.” Here is short transcript of what he had to say:

L: One guy who took..um..the pictures lives right over here on 17th street

CIT: He took pictures of your cab?

L: and, um…. he took pictures … He was up on the bridge. He took pictures of the pole, he took pictures of the car.

CIT: Oh, right.

L: And as far as I know he still has them.

When cameras started rolling England states the exact opposite and refused to admit he was anywhere near the bridge. Later on in the film he becomes more candid:

L: I’m not supposed to be involved in all this… This is their thing.

CIT: Meaning they are doing it for their own reasons?

Pentagon_taxi_hit_by_lightpole

Lloyd England by his car after the Pentagon attack and before the collapse.

L: That’s right. I’m not supposed to be in.

CIT: But they used you right?

L: I’m in it.

CIT: You’re in it?

L: Yeah, we came across … across the highway together.

CIT: You and their “event”?

L: That’s right.

CIT: Then they must have planned it?

L: It was planned. […] One thing about it you gotta understand something, when people do things and get away with it – you…eventually it’s going to come to me. And when it comes to me it’s going to be so big I can’t do nothin’ about it….So, it has to be stopped in the beginning when it’s small, you see, to keep it from spreading.” [18]

CIT claim that England was cautious not to “outright confess,” working hard to distance himself from the planners while admitting it was planned. They believe this is corroboration for other witness statements in the film testifying to a North side approach, the staging of the light-poles and cab event and thus the plane could not have hit the Pentagon.

One researcher Gerard Holmgren and his brilliant analysis found that many of the testimonies were seriously flawed or in Holmgren words: “What appeared at first reading to be 19 eyewitness accounts…actually turned out to be none.” Yet he was open-minded and aware that: “Eyewitnesses who are vague on fine details are generally more likely to be telling the truth than those who claim to have meticulously taken in everything. But there should be some indication that the object was a large passenger jet, and could not have been a much smaller jet, a military craft, a light plane, a helicopter or a cruise missile.” His meticulous findings concluded that such indications did not materialise. [21]

The source of his initial research of eyewitness accounts focused on a website called http://www.urbanlegends.about.com, which included a rebuttal of the theory that Flight77 did not hit the Pentagon. The main evidence presented was the listing of 19 web-linked eyewitness accounts of the event which appeared to be compelling at first glance. On closer inspection Holmgren found they were all missing a “basic condition” in that: “the witnesses did not actually claim to see the Pentagon hit by the plane. What they claimed was to have seen a plane flying way too low, and then immediately afterwards to have seen smoke or an explosion coming from the direction of the Pentagon which was out of sight at the time of the collision.” This became a familiar theme which could not be in anyway termed “evidence” and thus had to be ruled out. This, in addition to logistical and photographic inconsistencies, non-existent witnesses, tampering with witness reports and possible examples of CoIntelpro, led Holmgren to conclude: “… that there is no eyewitness evidence to support the theory that F77 hit the Pentagon …” [22]

pentagon

After the collapse of the outer ring. Of course, that’s where all the plane wreckage is buried…But didn’t they say the plane reached two inner rings of the Pentagon? Did they collapse? Nope. Any wreckage there? Nope.

An enormous contribution to 9/11 official theory derives from witness testimony disseminated by the MSM has come down to us as fact when it is more often a product of trauma-induced confusion sitting alongside careful disinformation. Most of these witnesses were either Pentagon employees, thus unreliable, or USA Today reporters such as Walters whose statements have been heavily referenced. However, as Canadian author and independent journalist Dave McGowan points out, knowing what we know about media complicity in PSYOPS, can we trust what these reporters have to say about the events, given the newspaper’s background and a distinct pattern of USA Today interest which has emerged?

McGowan explains: “USA Today and Navy Times are both part of the Gannett family of news outlets. … Gannett also publishes Air Force Times, Army Times, Marine Corp Times, Armed Forces Journal, Military Market, Military City, and Defence News. In other words, it’s just your typical independent, civilian media organization. Having established that, let’s now take a look at who our group of mystery witnesses are (or who they were at the time of the Pentagon attack):

  • Bob Dubill was the executive editor for USA Today.
  • Mary Ann Owens was a journalist for Gannett.
  • Richard Benedetto was a reporter for USA Today.
  • Christopher Munsey was a reporter for Navy Times.
  • Vin Narayanan was a reporter for USA Today.
  • Joel Sucherman was a multimedia editor for USA Today.
  • Mike Walters was a reporter for USA Today.
  • Steve Anderson was the director of communications for USA Today.
  • Fred Gaskins was the national editor for USA Today.
  • Mark Faram was a reporter for Navy Times. [23]

The odds of all those USA Today reporters being on sight and in such numbers and touting the same story counter to the evidence is a stretch. Or as McGowan reiterates: “So unless USA Today staff was holding its annual company picnic on the Pentagon lawn that morning, it seems to me that there is something seriously wrong with this story.” [13] This is the same newspaper which reported that Andrews Air Base: “… had no fighters assigned to it,” and in a later piece, that Andrews did have fighters present “but those planes were not on alert” both statements of which were wholly untrue. As evidence from multiple reports that immediately after the attack on the Pentagon, F-16s from Andrews were flying over Washington.[24]

It is also true to say that this doesn’t mean that USA Today was necessarily in on the official story conspiracy. As Holmgren mentions: “if a newspaper gives a one line quote from an anonymous witness and gives no details of when, where or how the quote was gathered, does not specify who wrote the story and gives no other details, then this is not an eyewitness account. It is hearsay.” And the vast majority of eyewitness accounts which support the official story are precisely that.

pentagonstrikewww.pentagonstrike.co.uk/

The total lack of evidence of anything remotely fitting the description of a jet airliner being found at the scene should be the defining characteristic of the Pentagon attacks. Yet, the 9/11 Truth Movement cries “disinformation!” at the merest hint of such a suggestion since it opens a veritable hornet’s nest of uncomfortable questions which apparently, cannot be answered. (i.e. Where did Flight 77 go? What happened to the passengers? – and other conundrums.)

Just because this raises more complicated questions and “reinforces conspiracy theory” doesn’t mean that we should shy away from appraising a crime scene and reaching conclusions based on what is. Digging for truth is a dirty job and doesn’t necessarily fit into neat boxes with nice little ticks. Sometimes all we have is a framework upon which we can build further answers. Yet, the framework is crucial. If that is wrong then we are led down avenues of exploration which must be wrong too. And so it is with Flight 77 and the Pentagon.

 


Notes

[1] op. cit. Griffin (2004; p.34)
[2] Ibid. | TV Transcipt: ‘The Pentagon Goes to War’ National Military Command Centre, CNN American Morning with Paula Zahn | ‘Keeping the Heart of the Pentagon Beating’ By Jim Garamone, American Airforces Press Service, July 9 2006.
[3] op. cit. Clarke.
[4] Lipstick on a Pig: Winning In the No-Spin Era by Someone Who Knows the Game By Torie Clarke, Publishd by Free Press, 2006. (p.219 – 221)
[5] ‘1999 Report Warned of Suicide Hijack’ By John Soloman, AP Press, April 18 2002. (The report can be found in the Library of Congress, Federal Research Division, entitled: ’The Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism.’) George W. Bush denied he had ever since such a report despite the fact it is was commonly known to intel personnel and available all over the internet. | p.175; Learning Rants, Raves, and Reflections: A Collection of Passionate and Professional Perspectives Elliott Masie (Editor) Paul L. Nenninger: “Simulation at the Secret Service – As Real as it Gets” Published by Pfeiffer, 2005 | ISBN-10: 0787973025.
[6] ‘Ex-Navy Pilot Flies Flight 77’ http://www.911lies.org/was_911_an_inside_job.html
[7] ‘Wife of Solicitor General Alerted Him of Hijacking from Plane,’ by Tim O’Brien, CNN, September 11, 2001. (http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/pentagon.olson).
[8] op. cit. Griffin; (2004; p.28)
[9] Hannity & Colmes, Fox News, September 14, 2001 | http://www.s3.amazonaws.com/911timeline/2001/foxnews091401.html.
[10] ‘America’s New War: Recovering from Tragedy,’ Larry King Live, CNN, September 14, 2001 http://www.edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/14/lkl.00.html | ‘Ted Olson’s Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials’ by David Ray Griffin, Global Research, April 01, 2008.
[11] Ibid.
[12] ‘Ted Olson’s Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials’By David Ray Griffin, Global Research, April 01, 2008.
[13] U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) News Transcript: Secretary Rumsfeld Interview with Parade Magazine, Interview with Lyric Wallwork Winik. October 12 2001. http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx?transcriptid=3845
[14] 9/11 Deceptions by M.P.LeLong Published by XLibris 2011. (p.260)
[15] ‘September 11th 2001: A Cruise Missile at The Pentagon’ by Peter Wakefield Sault, http://www.odeion.org/ updated August 2012.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid.
[19] ‘Pentagon Attack Cab Driver Lloyde England’s Virtual Confession’ Citizen Investigation Team http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GHM5f9lVho | See the complete interviews with Lloyde here: thepentacon.com/eyeofthestorm.htm
[20] Perdue Universities RCAC center produced this Pentagon FEA simulation. Originally produced in 2003, before the 9/11 Truth movement, this groundbreaking FEA based simulation was followed by the more famous WTC North simulation, presented on Youtube. This simulation pioneered mass data input for 3D modeling and input, and developed file formats that allow universities to create, trade, and build a library of huge digital models of 3D aircraft, ships and buildings. By V. Popescu, C. Hoffmann, S. Kilic, M. Sozen, S. Meador, “Producing High-Quality Visualizations of Large-Scale Simulations”, Proc. of IEEE Visualization, Oct., 2003.
[21] http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/lofiversion/index.php?t4603.html
[22] ‘Did F77 hit the Pentagon? Eyewitness accounts examined: Examines the apparent contradiction between photographic evidence and eyewitness evidence.’ by Gerard Holmgren. 2:00am Mon Jun 17 ’02 (Modified on 2:19am Mon May 5 ’03)
[23] Ibid. On the question of “reporters” being planted to tell tall tales and support the official story Holmgren includes
[24] ‘September 11, 2001 Revisited’ By Dave McGowan, The Center for an Informed America Newsletter #68E April 12, 2005. http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr68e.html
[25] Ibid.
[26] ‘Military now a presence on home front’ By Andrea Stone, USA Today,September 16, 2001.

Flight 77 and the Pentagon (1)


All of this is physically impossible, plain and simple. The wings of a 757 can’t hit a concrete building at more than 500 mph without leaving a mark. And they certainly won’t be vaporized by exploding jet fuel.

- Craig McKee, 9/11 Researcher at Truth and Shadows

Whilst Building 7 appears to represent the more opportunistic aspect of the 9/11 attacks, the Twin Towers acting as the psychological centre piece for maximum effect, the official story of Flight 77 and its alleged impact of the Pentagon goes even further into the realms of the bizarre. Unlike the WTC, very little evidence was available through which to sift. This is more than a little strange since at 9:37 a.m. September 11, 2001, a Boeing jet airliner Flight 77 apparently crashed into the reinforced section of the Pentagon, killing 189 people.

At 8:20 am on September 11, American Airlines Flight 77 left Dulles Airport in Washington DC, veering off course at 8:46 for several minutes. By the time the plane had returned to its original flight path at 8.50 am radio contact had been lost, the transponder switched off and by 8.56 am the plane had vanished from radar. [1] Curiously, by 9:09 am FAA chief Jane Garvey had notified the White House that there may have been another plane down. At 9:25 am air traffic controllers at Dulles Airport issued a warning to the White House that a plane was approaching them at considerable speed. According to the 9/11 Commission, NORAD was not told that Flight 77 had been hijacked at this time or at any time prior to impact. However, the FAA has claimed they officially warned NORAD at 9:24 am and informally warned them even earlier.

The same questions asked of Flights 11 and 175 can be levelled at the response to Flight 77: What on earth were the authorities doing for half an hour? Why had no jets been scrambled? [2]

American Airlines Flight 77

American Airlines Flight 77

Andrews Air Base in the District of Columbia houses the 121st Fighter Squadron of the 113th Fighter Wing equipped with F-16 fighters; Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 321, supported by a reserve squadron; the Air National Guard (DCANG) which provides: “…combat units in the highest possible state of readiness.” Yet Washington remained undefended. A stated delay in Air Traffic clearance simply doesn’t cut the mustard when the biggest emergency of modern times was underway. As one ex-Pentagon employee observes: ““ATC Radar images were (and are) available in the under structures of the Pentagon, and any commercial flight within 300 miles of DC that made an abrupt course change toward Washington, turned off their transponder, and refused to communicate with ATC, would have been intercepted at supersonic speeds within a max of 9 minutes by a Fighter out of Andrews. Period. Why these planes weren’t, baffles me. If we could get fighters off the ground in 2 minutes then, we could now.” [3]

At 9:25 Vice President Dick Cheney and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice were ensconced in a bunker below the Whitehouse. Cheney is said to have been warned of an aircraft approaching Washington and confirmed by radar evidence tracking the plane as it reached a distance of 30 miles to Washington. [4] Meanwhile, air traffic controllers at Washington Dulles saw an unidentified plane (due to its transponder being turned off) or as David Ray Griffin mentions: “…shortly after AA 77’s transponder signal was lost, the flight was also lost to primary radar. So there was no ‘blip’ until much later, when a high-speed primary target… …is seen moving toward Washington.” [5]

This is later confirmed as Flight 77 travelling at such high speed (500 mph) and with a distinctive manoeuvrability that the experienced Dulles Air traffic controllers thought it was a military fighter plane. One controller also expressed reservations about Flight 77 being a commercial flight: “Nobody knew that was American 77.… I thought it was a military flight. I thought that Langley [Air Force Base] had scrambled some fighters and maybe one of them got up there.… It was moving very fast, like a military aircraft might move at a low altitude.” [6]

Accordingly, the “commercial Jet airliner” Flight 77 was seen by radar making for the Pentagon, which it reached at 9:35 before making an extremely – if not impossible – 300 degree loop reportedly flying: “several miles south of the restricted airspace around the White House.” It performs rapid downward spiral: “dropping the last 7,000 feet in two and a half minutes,” accelerating to 530 mph before crashing into the West wing of the Pentagon at 9:37 am. [7]

Attack Path

Flight Path of American Airlines Flight 11. Such a maneuver is impossible for a expert pilot let alone an amateur one. It is also against the law of aviation physics. | “At 9 11, four planes for two hours were able to drive around, fly around even one hour in the direction going toward the west and then turn around and then comeback. The military air force was not able to interdict them. It’s [un]imaginable.” – Andreas Von Buelow – Former assistant German defense minister, director of the German Secret Service, minister for research and technology, and member of Parliament for 25 years.

Before getting into just a few of the countless oddities that make up the Pentagon attacks, let’s return to the overriding question and which has never been convincingly answered: how on earth did a Boeing 757 jet airliner penetrate the most heavily protected US military citadel on earth? When the aircraft breached White House airspace then why didn’t the automated missile system shoot it down?

There are claims by 9/11 debunkers who cling to the official conspiracy theory that there is no evidence that these defence systems exist, hence the problem. It would surely be against the most basic military-intelligence protocol to telegraph where these defence systems are located. According to Navy Combat Systems Specialist Dennis Cimino: “The sabotage of routine protective systems, controlled by strict hierarchies would never have been contemplated let alone attempted absent the involvement of the supreme US military command.” He states further that this would include:  “…President George Bush, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and the then-acting Head of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Meyers.” [8]

The Pentagon is protected by State-of-the-Art antimissile batteries or Raytheon Basic Point Defence missile battery armaments embedded on several building rooftops. Cimino adds: “With anti-aircraft missile defences installed in rooftops in the Washington, D.C. area since the mid 1980’s” and likely versions of the “PAC-3 ‘Patriot’ Missile systems and Secret Service agents on the roof with shoulder fired STINGER Missiles, protecting the White House, the claims that the capability did not exist is an untenable assertion. [9] 

George-W-Bush_Dick CheneyGeorge W. Bush and Dick Cheney: The Monkey and the Organ Grinder?

Cimino further explains that the Sea Sparrow air defines missiles are used:

“… much in the same fashion that Moscow has a system that NATO code named ‘Yo Yo’ that maintains radar surveillance and provides protection to the Kremlin and other high value targets from military incursions. A ‘MODE 4A military I.F.F. response’ (identify friendly or foe – enemy aircraft) which requires special encryption and restricted to use by military aircraft with an additional ‘mission specific MODEX aka SEDSCAF number’ assigned for each plane’ if it is required to ‘meet PLAN OF THE DAY for the area.’”

Cimino tells us it is this number which “… enables an aircraft then to penetrate prohibited or military restricted airspace such as that which surrounds both the White House and the Pentagon, as well as a number of military installations around the globe.” Without this IFF any aircraft would be shot down.” [10]

The question remains: Who “unplugged” the defence systems? The night cleaner?

pentagon-path-markerThe Pentagon aftermath from overhead video footage

When 130 billion of US tax dollars were funnelled into the Pentagon’s Strategic Defence Initiative (Star Wars) during the Reagan years, US officials claimed the system could detect and intercept missiles fired from an unknown destination traveling at well over 10 times the speed of a commercial airliner, and to shoot them down in 15 minutes or less, before they reached their US targets. [11] What is more, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) tells us that: “a defensive system may need to hit a warhead smaller than an oil drum that is traveling above the atmosphere at speeds greater than 13,000 miles per hour.” The CBO report states that missile defines and intercept systems must take down an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) in a matter of minutes, or its curtains. [12]

Journalist and ex-US government employee Fred Burkes summarises the mystery:

“If these sophisticated military systems were designed to detect missiles fired from unknown locations at over 13,000 mph and shoot them down in mere minutes, why on 9/11 could they not detect any one of the four large airliners traveling at a mere 600 mph, especially when two of them were known to be lost for over 40 minutes before they crashed? … How is it possible that the Pentagon’s highly touted missile detections systems could not locate Flight 77 in the 42 minutes it was known to be lost before it crashed into the heart of the defense system of the U.S.?” [13]

Which is why a Pentagon spokesman’s response that they were: “… simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way… ” is a load of hokum. How is it possible that with the highly sophisticated radar systems such as the PAVE PAWS which “does not miss anything occurring in North American airspace” yet couldn’t detect a huge Boeing 757 on a crash course to the Pentagon with ample amounts of time to do so? [14] If the plug had somehow been pulled on that system, then are we expected to believe that the Pentagon’s National Military Command Centre, NORAD and the FAA had all decided to have an extended coffee break where standard operating procedures suddenly didn’t apply?

pave-paws-1

PAVE PAWS radar system | Source: globalsecuirty.org

Griffin underscores this confusion when he states: “… if F-16s were airborne by 9:30, as alleged, they would have to travel slightly over 700 mph to reach Washington before Flight 77 does. The maximum speed of an F-16 is 1,500 mph. Even at traveling 1,300 mph, these planes could have reached Washington in six minutes – well before any claim of when Flight 77 crashed. […] Why is the emergency considered important enough to stop all takeoffs from Washington at this time, but not important enough to scramble even a single plane to defend Washington?” [15]

There was also ample time to evacuate all Pentagon personnel. Top officials were well aware of the WTC attacks with air traffic controllers having spotted an unidentified fast-flying aircraft heading towards the Pentagon and the White House at 9:25. By the time of the crash at 9.37am the Pentagon’s ‘War Room’ or Executive Support Centre (ESC) had been in session for at least half an hour watching WTC footage. [16] 30 minutes to a minimum of 12 minutes before the Pentagon was hit, almost everyone could have been evacuated or at least attempts could have been made by a so-called military machine priding itself on safety protocols. Apparently, those in the ESC didn’t even know that they had been hit and it is only when Donald Rumsfeld enters the War Room after thoroughly annoying everyone at the crash scene that anyone knew anything was amiss. If Donald knew all about it and half the Pentagon was smashed in you’d think the heart of the defensive nexus would have at least known the whereabouts of the Secretary of Defence.[17]

Firstly, notwithstanding the fact that Flight 77 was able to hit the Pentagon by executing an almost impossible downward spiral, it is incredible that so little damage was done. The pilot, Hani Hanjour, was not just an amateur but painfully inept. Peggy Chevrette, Arizona Flight School Manager stated in a New York Times piece: “I’m still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon … He could not fly at all … “I couldn’t believe he had a commercial license of any kind with the skills that he had”. [18]

pentagon1

Pentagon aftermath. We are meant to believe that a Boeing Jet Airliner hit the outer wall and vapourised – including wings, undercarriage and engines.  (Source: top: 9/11Review.org | Bottom: Alex Wong/Getty Images

The impact targeted the first floor of the Pentagon’s reinforced west wall, the only part of the Pentagon having recently undergone extensive renovation, causing heavy damage to the building’s three outer rings. Destruction ploughed a path through Army accounting offices on the outer E Ring, the Navy Command Centre on the D Ring, and the Defence Intelligence Agency’s comptroller’s office on the C Ring. It seems nonsensical that the terrorists would aim the plane at an 8ft façade in the process of being renovated and reinforced – and therefore with less people present – when they could have crashed into the roof, a far more expansive target with the possibility of killing far more military personnel. As it happens, most of those killed were civilians.

Now, here’s where it gets truly surreal, as Griffin explains:

“…since the aircraft penetrated only the first three rings of the Pentagon, only the nose of a Boeing 757 would have gone inside…The rest of the airplane would have remained outside. […] ‘While the plane’s nose is made of carbon and the wings, containing the fuel, can burn, the Boeing’s fuselage is aluminium and the jet engines are built out of steel. At the end of the fire, it would necessarily left a burnt-out wreck.” […]

… on a Boeing 757,…the jet engines, made of steel, are attached to the wings, so the wings would hit the facade with great force. And yet prior to the collapse…the photos reveal no visible damage to the facade on either side of the orifice, even where the engines would have hit the building…the fact that the photographs clearly show that the facade above the opening is completely intact and even unmarked creates a still more insuperable problem, given Boeing 757’s big tail.”[19]

Furthermore, for a Boeing 757 in excess of 63 tons (virtually empty) to over 100 tons (full) it makes little sense that only the first ring of the building was destroyed so that the second and third rings would only reveal a hole about seven feet in diameter. [20]

In the immediate aftermath of the explosion one would have expected a vast amount of material evidence to have come from a massive 63 ton Boeing 757 Jet airliner crashing into a federal building at a speed of over 530 mph. An aircraft of this size as well as the history of plane crashes show that a huge quantity of debris and smouldering destruction would be spread over a significantly wide area. With no clusters of fires except on the Pentagon itself, only a few pieces of the alleged plane remained, exhibiting no scorching from the alleged “fireball” and which were picked up by hand. What about the thousands of gallons of jet fuel that would have been spilled across the crash site? There was no clean-up of the ground in evidence at any time. If the Boeing 757’s fuselage is made from aluminium and engines made from steel, then no hydrocarbon fire is going to melt them let alone leave no trace as we are being asked to believe.

mystery_debris

The tiny remains of so-called plane debris. But is it from American Airlines?

pl1

This is the Pentagon lawn immediately outside the Pentagon and after the crash of Flight 77. Fancy a game of golf?

This also leaves the question of the upper floors which survived this elusive inferno. There was no evidence of the sort of intense heat required to completely vanish a jet airliner leaving virtually no debris behind on the Pentagon lawn. More than 35 minutes after the crash at 10.15 am the front section of the Pentagon which had been hit by Flight 77 collapsed exposing the interior. Computers, office furniture and even books and files could clearly be seen and were perfectly intact showing no signs of fire damage. [21]

pentagon-inside-hole

This is the approx, 20ft, ground floor hole that American Airlines Flight 77 is said to have vanished into. No damage from he wings either side, no damage on the front lawn.

What was perhaps the most glaring anomaly in the whole media-led illusion was the 18 foot diameter impact hole on the second floor which the jet airliner was meant to have squeezed itself into. If the building’s façade was about 18 feet in diameter and the diameter of the fuselage of Flight 77 around 12 feet; wingspan about 125 feet, with the tip of the tail is about 44 feet from the ground, it begs the question if it did miraculously suck itself into the length of the impact pathway then all those plane parts had to have been left behind. [22] But there was nothing of the kind. The condition of the Pentagon lawn was so pristine lawn that it could have hosted a golfing tournament. The official theory would like us to believe that the 6 ton titanium engines, the wings and the tail simply vaporised. They say this, because no sign of them can be found at the crash site. Not even the seat cushions. [23] Or, as Jamie McKintyre of CNN News observed: “[F]rom my close up inspection there’s no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon… …The only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you could pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage— nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon.”[24]

So, perhaps the wings were vapourised whilst being sucked into the 18 ft. hole which was in fact a worm-hole?

What is more, there is no sign that there were even any people on board the plane unless they were travelling extremely light as no luggage of any kind was found; no suitcases, shoes, clothing, or anything resembling personal effects that would indicate passengers were aboard. Though there were many victims inside the Pentagon, no bodies or body parts were recovered from the crash site. Alleged passengers were identified from DNA samples yet we are told that most of the Boeing 757 simply vaporised or evaporated which somehow left all the bodies intact yet invisible.

pentagon-plane

A mock-up by a French 9/11 researcher to illustrate how ridiculous the idea is that a Boeing 747 jet-airliner fuselage can somehow vanish into a 20ft to lie comfortably within the interior of the Pentagon, leaving no essential parts behind. Yet, at the same time we are told to believe that Flight 77 powered its flimsy way through three of the five concentric rings of the Pentagon complex.

pentagon-fireball

The orange fireball which people believe is evidence of the net result of a Boeing 747 hitting the outer wall. Where is exactly is all the jet fuel? The wings? Fuselage? wheels? Chairs? Tail-fin? Engine?

The credulity needed to accept the kind of reality where a 125-foot-wide airplane created and then went inside a hole less than 20-feet wide, is beyond anything approaching logic and rationale. Yet, that is apparently what we are expected to believe – even within much of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

9/11 investigators have commented on why the videos surrounding the Pentagon approach were either not working or had been confiscated by the FBI allegedly for analysis. None of the confiscated surveillance and security video tapes from hotels and gas stations, traffic cameras, have been released. Although after much pressure from 9/11 Truth Movement and certain sections of the political and public arena the Department of Defence finally released two clips from Pentagon security cameras no doubt chosen due to the fact they show absolutely nothing.

The standard cry from those confronted with the hint of a possibility that something other than a jet aircraft hit the Pentagon is a hands-on-hips question of: “Well, what happened to the plane and all the people?” This question alone is deemed more than enough proof that to contemplate any other scenario is both silly and pointless. Along with what can be seen and verified at the crash site the US authorities have refused to give any evidence to prove that Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon. Despite the FBI and the CIA having a record of lying as long as your arm, they expect us to dutifully trust them in the face of the most obvious evidence that something is very, very wrong.

It is clear from the voluminous analysis now available on internet journals that various examples of obfuscation and blocking by US and government agency officials have continued to this day. On October 14, 2001, flight control transcripts for the 9/11 aeroplanes were finally released. Yet the data on Flight 77 ends almost 20 minutes before it crashes. Could it be, out of many floated explanations that government officials simply didn’t want the press and public to hear what actually took place during the final 20 minutes of Flight 77?

 


Notes

[1] ‘FAA Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events September 11 2001 http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB165/faa7.pdf
[2] ‘ “We have planes. Stay quiet” – Then silence’ by Michael Ellison, The Guardian, 17 October 2001. | ‘Timeline in Terrorist Attacks of Sept. 11, 2001’ Staff and Wire Reports, Washington Post, September 12, 2001 | ‘9/11 commission staff statement No. 17,’ NBC News, http://www.msnbc.msn.com June 17, 2004.
[3] http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_timeline.html
[4] 9/11 National Commision on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States Public Hearing Friday, May 23, 2003. http://www.9-11commission.gov/ | ‘Clear the skies’ September 8, 2002 http://www.mnet.co.za
[5] p.232; Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the .Official Conspiracy Theory by David Ray Griffin,, Olive Branch Press, 2007 | ISBN-10: 156656686X
[6] ‘Get These Planes on the Ground’ Air Traffic Controllers Recall Sept. 11: ABC News October 24, 2001.| MSNBC Transcript: ‘American Remembers, Air Traffic Controllers Describe How Events Unfolded As They Saw Them on September 11th.’ MSNBC Dateline. September 11, 2002.
[7] ‘Probe reconstructs horror, calculated attacks on planes’ By Glen Johnson, The Boston Globe, November 23, 2001. | ‘Primary Target’ CBS News, February 11, 2009 | ‘Primary Target’ CBS News, February 11, 2009. | ‘Part I: Terror attacks brought drastic decision: Clear the skies’ By Alan Levin, Marilyn Adams and Blake Morrison, USA Today, August 12, 2002 | National Transportation and Safety Board, Office of Research and Engineering, Washington D.C. 20594, Febraury 19 2002. Flight Path Study American Airlines Flight 77. http://www.ntsb.gov/info/Flight_ Path_ Study_AA77.pdf
[8] ‘The Official Account of the Pentagon Attack is Fantasy’ March 3, 2012. http://www.veteranstoday.com By Dennis Cimino and Jim Fetzer,| Dennis Cimino, A.A., EE; 35-years EMI/EMC testing, field engineering; FDR testing and certifications specialist; Navy Combat Systems Specialist; 2,000 hours, Pilot in Command, Commercial Instrument Single and Multi-Engine Land Pilot, Eastern Airlines 727-200, Second Officer. Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer and founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] ‘Ill-Starred ‘Star Wars’ Tests’ Los Angeles Times, December 20, 2004.
[12] ‘Alternatives for Boost-Phase Missile Defense’ CBO Report, July 1, 2004. http://www.cbo.gov/publication/15852
[13] ‘9/11, Pentagon, and Missile Defense: $130 Billion on Pentagon’s Missile Defense Fails to Stop Four Airliners on 9/11’ By Fred Burkes, http://www.wanttoknow.info.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Paul Thompson (9:03-9:08 AM), citing USA Today, September 12 and 13, 2002.
[16] U.S. Department of Defense Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) Speech Testimony Prepared for Delivery to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States | http://www.defense.gov/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=105 | Testimony Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, Washington, DC, Tuesday, March 23, 2004.
[17] p.5; Rumsfeld: His Rise, Fall, and Catastrophic Legacy By Andrew Cockburn, Published by Scribner 2007. | ISBN-10: 1416535748.
[18] ‘A Trainee Noted for Incompetence’ By Jim Yardley, New York Times, May 4, 2002.
[19] 9/11:The Big Lie By Thierry Meyssan Published by Carnot Editions 2003. ISBN-10: 1592090265 | p.22.
[20] Aircraft Information Boeing 757/767: http://www.simviation.com/rinfo75767.htm
[21] op. cit. LeLong (p.118)
[22] ‘Evidence That a Frozen Fish Didn’t Impact the Pentagon on 9/11and Neither Did a Boeing 757’ by Joe Quinn, Sott.net, June 9, 2006.
[23] http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_16.htm
[24] ‘Live CNN Report of Jamie McIntyre at the Pentagon’ | http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C02dE5VKeck

WTC Building 7 (2)


“Of course, we all wish we could have gotten it done a lot faster.”

- Larry Silverstein on Sep 09, 2014 after the completion of the lower Manhattan revival

On July 24, 2001, just seven weeks before the attacks, Larry and his Silverstein Properties signed a $3.2 billion deal to purchase a 99-year lease on the WTC complex including the Twin Towers, World Trade Centre Buildings 4 and 5 (two nine-story office buildings), and about 425,000 square feet of retail space. It was the first time that the WTC was placed under private control in its 33 year history. Silverstein made a down-payment of $124 million and quickly insured it for $3.6 billion. In this insurance contract he was conveniently covered against “terrorist attacks” and specifically given the right to rebuild the structures if they were destroyed. What makes this move doubly suspicious is that the building itself was worth considerably less than the amount he had it insured for. In fact, the World Trade Centre towers were “filled with asbestos” and deemed “nearly worthless” at the time. [1]

Very soon after the attacks Silverstein, now 83, declared his intent to re-build but not before he filed for damages of over $7 billion from his insurers. He claimed the attacks on the World Trade Centre constituted two separate events and thus entitling him to double the pay-out. [2] (After years of financial wrangling with the insurance company, Swiss Re, he was paid $4.6 Billion)

Larry-Silverstein

Larry Silverstein

Not being one to ignore safety and security (especially when his own skin is involved) Mr. Silverstein changed the security company for Securacom (now Stratosec). The board of directors included George W. Bush’s brother, Marvin Bush and the CEO was none other than Marvin’s cousin, Wirt Walker III. (Securacom’s job was to provide electronic security for the WTC and also Dulles International Airport and United Airlines, both of which had a key part to play in the 911 attacks). [3]

Members of the Silverstein family and associated high level business colleagues survived the WTC tragedy. Instead of the usual, scheduled breakfast meeting to take place at the WTC, Larry had a doctor’s appointment on September 11th.

One year after the September 11th attacks Silverstein gave an interview for the 2002, PBS documentary America Rebuilds. He then makes a serious gaff by telling the PBS reporters: “I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, ‘We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.”

It seems to me – and one would imagine anyone hearing words like “pull” and “collapse” in the same sentence – that this would be referring to demolition of a building. Journalist Joël van der Reijden, writing in a 2005 article on 9/11 contacted implosionworld who told him the following:

“There is no such phrase in explo-demo. Most likely he meant “pull out” as in have people evacuate. Conventionally, “pull a building” can mean to pre-burn holes in steel beams near the top floor and affix long cables to heavy machinery, which then backs up and causes the structure to lean off its center of gravity and eventually collapse. But this is only possible with buildings about 6-7 stories or smaller. This activity was performed to bring down WTC 6 (Customs) after 9/11 because of the danger in demolishing conventionally.” [4]

It is also worth remembering that he said “pull it” Not “pull them”. The word “it” was referring to the building as anyone can logically deduce. Later attempts by Silverstein to claim that he was talking about pulling the fire-fighters from WTC 7 is implausible in the extreme considering there was no one left inside at the time of the statement. This is verified by the fact that Silverstein has admitted that he made his “pull it” statements “at about 3:30 or 4:00pm,” [5] with the official NIST report indicating that Building 7 had already been fully evacuate between 12:30pm and 2:00pm. [6] So, when Silverstein and the fire commander were apparently having this conversation to “pull it” everyone was long gone.

However, there is something odd about the whole thing. Would Silverstein really have let slip such a thing if he did indeed have insider knowledge? We hardly need such an obvious statement to deduce that building 7 was demolished. Reijden believes it is a red herring, which may be the case. As to Silverstein’s “need-to-know” role in the events of 9/11 is obviously vague. Financially however, he was set to gain by this tragedy and gain substantially.

A 2010 Fox News report by Jeffrey Scott Shapiro reported on an alleged discussion Silverstein had had with his insurance carrier about demolishing Building 7:

“Shortly before the building [Building 7] collapsed, several NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein … was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building – since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall. A controlled demolition would have minimized the damage caused by the building’s imminent collapse and potentially save lives. Many law enforcement personnel, firefighters and other journalists were aware of this possible option.” [7]

Shapiro ended up shooting himself in the foot with this admission because the report was designed to be a hit piece against Governor Jesse Ventura who is highly sceptical of the official story. Finally, if true, Shapiro’s statements not only suggest foreknowledge and criminal culpability on the part of Silverstein, but confirm the reality of a controlled demolition.

Fourteen years later After Mr. Silverstein used the insurance proceeds from the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks to help fund the construction of 4 World Trade Center and 7 World Trade Center, Silverstein Properties is still busily raking over the mythos of Ground Zero and making considerable profits to boot. His latest building project is World Trade Center Tower 3 a planned 80-story, 2.5 million-square-foot, $2.3 billion office tower in the financial district of WTC. [8]

Unfortunately, for Larry, the construction loans amount to $1.1 billion, a sum that the Port Authority refused to guarantee, much to his apparent “surprise”, citing doubts about profitability amid a depressed market. According to  Crain’s New York Business:

“Mr. Silverstein has burned through more than $460 million that was available for 3 World Trade Center building the property’s below-grade infrastructure and first eight stories, where it is currently capped. That space will be used for retail and the mechanical systems for the neighboring PATH hub—areas of the building that Silverstein Properties does not control.” [9]

Since he and his private sector cartels are used to profiting from tragedy if need be, this must indeed be a blow. As Chris Ward, the former executive director of the Port Authority mentioned, no doubt with a wry smile: “Larry was used to getting everything he wanted at the site,” … “To lose the support he was hoping to get, I think must be a shock and a blow.” 

Poor Larry.

This set back didn’t stop him in his decade-old bid to recover billions of dollars from two airlines whose planes were used in the 9/11 attacks in order to rebuild the World Trade Centre. Having already collected the tidy sum of $4.1 Billion from insurers over the WTC destruction U.S. District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein thankfully rejected his bid on July 19th 2013.

Perhaps he should hold out for another “terrorist” attack on his latest rebuild?

wtc7-old-new1

The Old WTC 7 (left) and the New WTC 7 started in 2002 and completed in 2006 | Source: Wikipedia and www.911review.com/

There are other reasons why WTC 7 may have needed to be “pulled “on 911. The sky-scraper wasn’t just another office building but housed financial institutions and government agencies including the offices of the IRS, Secret Service, SEC and the CIA (though the latter was not listed). The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) had their work cut out after the financial terrorism of 2008. But SEC had been working hard on many case files for 3000 – 4000 of its cases, a “substantial” number of which were stored in building 7 and reportedly destroyed during the implosion. The EEOC reported that documents for 45 active cases were also destroyed. [10] SEC was still covering investigations of corporate fraud by companies such as Enron and Worldcom before the 911 attacks though nothing more has been heard of these and similar investigations. (See Table below).

This is not the only whiff of opportunism in the air. According to a New York Times report from November 2001, the CIA’s clandestine New York station “… believed to have been the largest and most important C.I.A. domestic station outside the Washington area,” was also destroyed. The Times continued: “The agency’s New York station was behind the false front of another federal organization, which intelligence officials requested that The Times not identify. The station was, among other things, a base of operations to spy on and recruit foreign diplomats stationed at the United Nations, while debriefing selected American business executives and others willing to talk to the C.I.A. after returning from overseas.” The agency’s officers in New York often work undercover, posing as diplomats and business executives, among other things, depending on the nature of their intelligence operations. [11]

The reporter gives us the background about the stalwart defenders of US freedom had sharpened up their act since the Iranian embassy hostage crisis of 1980. Since then, no classified documents would see the light of day even under such dire circumstances as the 911 attacks. One could also speculate that there would have been even less of a paper trail if this CIA front wasn’t solely an intelligence hub at all but served as the central command centre for the demolition(s) themselves. The report goes on to say that: “… the C.I.A. seems poised to begin focusing its resources on terrorism in much the same way it once focused on the Soviet Union in the cold war.” [12]

Which is exactly what may have been required: a new reason for those tax dollars and the introduction of a whole new episode in Cold War propaganda to fuel that insatiable military-corporate-intelligence machine. After all, this is standard Zio-Conservative ideology: perpetual war serviced by the a global financial shock doctrine. 

Tenant

Square Feet

Floor

Industry

Salomon Smith Barney

1,202,900

GRND, 1-6,13,18- 46

Financial Institution

IRS Regional Council

90,430

24, 25

Government

U.S. Secret Service

85,343

9,10

Government

C.I.A.

N/A

N/A

Government

American Express Bank International

106,117

7,8,13

Financial Institution

Standard Chartered Bank

111,398

10,13,26,27

Financial Institution

Provident Financial Management

9,000

7,13

Financial Institution

ITT Hartford Insurance Group

122,590

19-21

Insurance

First State Management Group, Inc.

4,000

21

Insurance

Federal Home Loan Bank

47,490

22

Financial Institution

NAIC Securities

22,500

19

Insurance

Securities & Exchange Commission

106,117

11,12,13

Government

Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management

45,815

23

Government

Organisations, agencies and companies in Building 7 on September 11th 2001. (And the CIA).  [Courtesy of Jim Hoffman http://www.WTC7.net.

If the above love-in between intelligence and financial sharks all under one roof doesn’t cause concern then I’m not sure what does. Right at the bottom we find our super-hero Mayor once again.

Rudy Giuliani received an honorary knighthood by the Queen and managed to have his mug plastered across Time magazine as person of the year 2001, despite the Fire and Police department offering a very different view of Rudy’s contribution. [13] As we know, Mayor Giuliani vacated WTC 7 just a few hours before it was “pulled.”

His Office of Emergency Management, and its emergency command centre was on the 23rd floor, and against considerable public protest had already received 13 million dollars’ worth of renovations, “… reinforced, bulletproof, and bomb-resistant walls, its own air supply and water tank, beds, showers to accommodate 30 people, and three backup generators.” It also had: “… rooms full of video monitors from where the mayor can oversee police and fire department responses and where it was: “… staffed around the clock and … intended as a meeting place for city leaders in the event of an act of terrorism.” [14]

The centre was ridiculed as “Rudy’s bunker,” and according to author Philip Shenon it: “… seemed the supreme example of how Giuliani’s ego and arrogance knew no bounds after four years in office.” [15] In Giuliani’s modestly named biography Leadership (2002) he states: “As shocking as [the first] crash was, we had actually planned for just such a catastrophe.” [16] All of that being so, as 9/11 journalist Jim Hoffman at WTC7.net mentions: “How curious that on the day of the attack, Giuliani and his entourage set up shop in a different headquarters, abandoning the special bunker designed precisely for such an event.” [17]

It is commonly known that various officials on the day relayed warnings that something was afoot with Building 7 – namely, that it was in danger of coming down. The rumour that the building was falling was in the air. The ubiquity of foreknowledge seemed to extend to the TV networks in what can only be described as a major glitch in communications. Yet, two TV networks announced the collapse of WTC 7 before it had actually happened.

Discovered in a vast archive of broadcast footage publicized in late February of 2007, a video clip of CNN anchor Aaron Brown was seen announcing live, that: “We are getting information now that one of other buildings, building 7, in the world trade centre complex is on fire and has either collapsed or is collapsing.” Allowing for confusion, who was it that told him that a collapse was even a possibility? [18]

bbc-wtc-building-7BBC journalist Jane Standley on end of a confusing cock-up in timing. Who got it wrong and wrote the script? | Source: The Goddard Report archives

Similarly, archived footage of television broadcasts from 9/11/2001 shows the BBC’s Jane Standley reporting the collapse of WTC 7 about 23 minutes before it actually occurred. She is unaware that the building is still standing behind her. At 4:57pm the BBC News anchor Philip Haton announced: “…We’ve got some news just coming in actually, that the Salomon Brothers’ [WTC 7] Building in New York, right in the heart of Manhattan, has also collapsed.” At 5:07 pm he continues:

“Now more on the latest building collapse in New York … you may have heard a few moments ago we were talking about the Salomon Brothers Building collapsing and indeed it has, and apparently it’s only a few hundred yards away from where the World Trade Center Towers were. And it seems that this was not the result of a new attack; it was because the building had been weakened during this morning’s attacks. We’ll probably find out more about that from our correspondent Jane Standley. Jane, what more can you tell us about the Salomon Brothers’ Building and its collapse?” [19]

Standley explained in a later interview: “It’s very unfortunate that this whole conspiracy – kind of – ridiculous situation has grown out of what’s really a very small and very honest mistake.”  [20] Actually, it was a rather enormous mistake, the import of which seems to have been lost on her. Reporting that the Solomon building had collapsed, while it actually remained standing in the live shot behind her head until the BBC promptly cut the feed seems more than a little odd. Just 23 minutes later when WTC 7 did collapse suggests scripted foreknowledge on the part of someone, though not necessarily the reporters in question.

The BBC’s Richard Porter defended the organisation from accusations of foreknowledge stating:

“We no longer have the original tapes of our 9/11 coverage (for reasons of cock-up, not conspiracy). So if someone has got a recording of our output, I’d love to get hold of it. We do have the tapes for our sister channel News 24, but they don’t help clear up the issue one way or another. If we reported the building had collapsed before it had done so, it would have been an error – no more than that. As one of the comments on You Tube says today ‘so the guy in the studio didn’t quite know what was going on? Woah, that totally proves conspiracy…’” [21]

Porter’s protestations are correct in that foreknowledge does not necessarily imply complicity on the part of the BBC reporter and staff. What he fails to acknowledge is why such a precise “cock-up” regarding the collapse of WTC 7 was even on the table. Who was it that communicated the information to create such a scenario? Who planted the seed?

 


Notes

[1] ‘Asbestos in the WTC’ Towers’ Destruction ‘Solved’ Asbestos Problem’ www 911research.wtc7.net/ | “The Twin Towers had large amounts of asbestos fireproofing which would have necessitated costly removal had they remained standing. The exact amount and distribution of the asbestos in the Towers remains unclear, like other details of the buildings’ construction and history, but the evidence suggests that the cost of its removal may have rivaled the value of the buildings themselves.”
[2] ‘Magnate’s Tower Plan Under Threat’, By Simon English, Daily Telegraph, October 10, 2001.
[3]‘Larry “Lucky Larry” Silverstein’ September 7 2006. http://www.informationliberation.com
[4]’9/11 – My own review of the entire event’ By Joel van der Reijden, March 19, 2005. | http://web.archive.org/web/20050327052408/http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/911_my_own_review.htm#222
[5] See “WeAreCHANGE confronts Larry Silverstein 3/13/08,” http://911blogger.com/node/14361,(1:45)
[6] NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Structural Fire Response and Probable Collapse Sequence of World Trade Center Building 7, Draft for Public Comment, August 2008, pages 301-302. See http://www.wtc.nist.gov/media/nist_ncstar_1-9_vol1_for_public_comment.pdf
[7] ‘Shame On Jesse Ventura!’By Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, FoxNews.com, April 22, 2010.
[8] ‘Silverstein: Build it and they will come’ By By Konrad Putzier, Real Estate Weekly, April 2, 2014.
[9] ‘The toughest test of Silverstein’s nine lives’ By Daniel Gieger, Crain’s New York Business, June 1, 2014.
[10] ‘SEC & EEOC: Attack Delays Investigations’, National Law Journal, September 17, 2001.
[11] ‘Secretive CIA Site in New York Was Destroyed on Sept. 11’ by James Risen, New York Times, November 4, 2001.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Rudy seemed to revel in the attention. In August 2007, Giuliani claimed that “I was at Ground Zero as often, if not more, than most workers…. I was there working with them. I was exposed to exactly the same things they were exposed to. So in that sense, I’m one of them.” This understandably caused anger amongst New York’s Fire and Police personnel 911 workers. In actual fact, Rudy was had also been telling porkies it seems. “He had spend a total of 29 hours over three months at the site; with his appointment logs unavailable for the six days immediately following the attacks. This contrasted with recovery workers at the site who spent this much time at the site in two to three days. The recovery workers often spent hundreds of hours working 8 to 12 hour shifts.” (Wikipedia: http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudy_Giuliani_during_the_September_11_attacks#During_the_attack
[14] ‘New York City’s Anti-Terrorism Efforts go Hi-Tec’ CNN.com, June 7, 1999.
[15] ‘Mayor of the World’ by Eric Pooley, Time, December 22, 2001.| The Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation by Philip Shenon. Published by Twelve, 2008. | ISBN-10: 0446580759 (pp.346 – 347)
[16] p.3-6; Leadership by Rudolph W. Giuliani Published by Miramax Books, 2002.
[17] Jim Hoffman, http://www.wtc7.net/background.html
[18] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1LetB0z8_o
[19] www.http://ia311517.us.archive.org/2/items/bbc200109111654-1736/V08591-16.mpg
[20]’9/11: “Honest Mistake” or BBC Foreknowledge of Collapse of WTC 7? Jane Standley Breaks Her Silence’ James Higham
Global Research, August 18, 2011-nourishingobscurity.com 18 August 2011.
[21] ‘Inside the BBC: Mission and values’ Richard Porter, February 2007 http://www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/whoweare/mission_and_values/

WTC Building 7 (1)


“This is a controlled demolition which was carried out by a team of experts.”

- Danny Jowenko, demolition expert, making the comment before he was told he was watching a video of the destruction of WTC building 7.

One of the most outrageous events of September 11th and even harder to explain using the official story is the destruction of one of New York City’s larger sky-scrapers, the 47 story Building 7, part of the WTC complex and which occupied an entire city block, it’s height reaching 600ft above street level. Whereas the Twin Towers exhibited an array of strange anomalies, Building 7 imploded in a manner wholly indistinguishable from a conventional building demolition.

According to a Zogby poll in 2006, 43 percent of Americans didn’t even know Building 7 existed, let alone that it was destroyed. What the public also may not know is that no plane hit the building, suffering only minimal damage after the destruction of the Twin Towers. By 2011, Siena Research Institute Poll commissioned by “Remember Building 7” Campaign showed that there was substantial skeptism about the official story. Almost half of the 643 New Yorkers polled were in favour of a new investigation into WTC 7’s collapse. Amidst the constant stream of propaganda-saturated media pumped into American living-rooms every day this is a significant rise in awareness.

The World Trade Centre complex buildings 3, 4, 5, and 6 were damaged more severely than Building 7; firstly, by falling rubble from the tower collapses, and then from fires which burned for hours on various floors. None of these buildings decided to implode. WTC 7 fell into its own footprint at 5.20pm on September 11th with a precision even more characteristic of a controlled demolition than the Twin Towers. No other explanation can account for this scenario unless it was simply the most mysterious, catastrophic structural failure in history. In which case, the laws of physics will have to be quickly re-written. Persistent attempts by the MSM to paint this destruction due to intense fires the evidence simply doesn’t add up.

wtc71-8

Sequential stills from the collapse of WTC 7 from video footage: ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnLcUxV1dPo

wtc7_collapse2_s

Watch a 9.6 sec. quick-time video from CBS News: (click on the image)

The official line is that these fires continued to burn throughout the afternoon on the lower floors due to the building’s  suppression system lacking water pressure to fight the fires, causing a collapse at 5:21 pm. This is said to have combined with the failure of a major internal column which buckled triggering a structural failure throughout, the visible signs of which can be seen in video footage of a rooftop penthouse structure crumbling at 5:20 pm. [1]

On the morning of September 11, 2001, the late Barry Jennings, a City Housing Authority worker and Michael Hess, New York̵ corporation counsel, became trapped inside Building 7. After trying to find their way down from the 23rd floor during a power outage they both heard what sounded like loud explosions below them when they reached the eight and then the sixth floors of the building. These were heard before 9:59am when the Twin Towers were still standing. Hess and Jennings were rescued by fire-fighters later that day. [2]

Confirming the story of Jennings and Hess, another eyewitness Craig Bartmer, Former NYPD, and 9/11 First Responder gave a vivid account of the WTC 7 as it fell into its own footprint:

“All of a sudden, the radios exploded and everybody started screaming, ‘Get away, get away, get away from it!’ And, I was like a deer in the headlights. And I looked up, and…Two guys that I knew were on the transit radio. I don’t know if those tapes are out there… And I looked up, and it was nothing I would ever imagine seeing in my life. You know the thing started peeling in on itself and, I mean there was an umbrella of crap seven feet over my head that I just stared at. Somebody grabbed my shoulder and I started running, and the shit’s hitting the ground behind me. And the whole time you’re hearing, ‘THOOM! THOOM! THOOM! THOOM! THOOM!’ So, I, I think I know an explosion when I hear it, you know? So yeah, I wanna know what took that building down. I don’t think it was a fire and it certainly wasn’t a plane…It had some damage to it but nothing like what they’re saying…I am shocked at the[official] story we’ve heard about it, to be quite honest.” [3]

Eyewitness Kevin McPadden, Emergency Medical Technician, and 9/11 First Responder had a similar story to tell:

“And, at the last few seconds, he took his hand off [the radio] and you heard “3-2-1”, and he was just saying, ‘Just run for your life, just run for your life.’ And then it was like another two, three seconds, you heard explosions. Like BA-BOOOOOM! And it’s like a distinct sound…BA-BOOOOOM! And you felt a rumble in the ground, like, almost like you wanted to grab onto something. That, to me, I knew that was an explosion. There was no doubt in my mind.” [4]

Just as it was in the case of the Twin Towers, the matter of a 100 steel-framed, high-rise fires which have occurred in the past not one building has ever collapsed. The conundrum also applies to Building 7. How the sky-scraper instantly went from full support to zero support was a matter that the NIST didn’t want to explore, despite its remit to do so. While initially claiming that WTC 7 collapsed slower than free-fall acceleration, it later confirmed the obvious due to pressure from certain members of the public. In the final report in November 2008, the “… free fall drop continued for approximately 8 stories, or 32.0 meters (105 ft.), the distance traveled between times t = 1.75 s and t = 4.0 s [a period of 2.25 seconds]” with the final duration at 6.5 seconds. Tellingly however, the NIST did not include why Building 7’s 2.25 second collapse could have occurred. To do so, would have meant deviating from the official conspiracy theory. [5]

wtc_diagram

Plan of the World Trade Centre | Source: University of Maryland at www.terpconnect.umd.edu/

The interested member of the public who took NIST to task was a Mr. Chandler who explained what the free-fall really meant: “The collapse we see cannot be due to a column failure, or a few column failures, or a sequence of column failures. All 24 interior columns and 58 perimeter columns had to have been removed over the span of 8 floors low in the building simultaneously to within a small fraction of a second, and in such a way that the top half of the building remains intact and uncrumpled.” [6]

A steel-cored, 47- story sky-scraper untouched by aeroplane impact and with minimal damage and limited fires decided to collapse in a uniform, symmetrical fashion through the path of greatest resistance – with 40,000 tons of steel designed to resist this load – straight down into its own footprint in just 6.5 seconds and still people have a hard time considering that only explosives could achieve such a result.

Release 41 DSCF0058

Photo taken 9/12 – Image source: FOIA documents release 41

Head of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Richard Gage is in no doubt that the fires and the temperatures achieved in Building 7 fell far short of the required heat to melt steel: “Such temperatures cannot be achieved by oxygen-starved hydrocarbon fires. Such fires burn at only 600 to 800° F”. [7] Gage also draws our attention to the evidence of: “… mistimed explosions (squibs?) at the upper seven floors on the network video recordings of the collapse. And we have expert testimony from a European demolitions expert, Danny Jowenko, who said ‘This is controlled demolition… a team of experts did this… This is professional work, without any doubt.’ ” [8] (More from Jowenko later).

Parallel to this conclusion and similar to the Twin Towers, evidence recorded on video at the base of WTC 7 confirm reports from fire department personnel who saw: “molten steel running down the channel rails … like you’re in a foundry – like lava from a volcano.” [9] Gage continues: “Appendix C of FEMA’s BPAT Report … documents steel samples showing rapid oxidation, sulfidation, and intergranular melting. A liquid eutectic mixture, including sulfur from an unknown source, caused intense corrosion of the steel, gaping holes in wide flange beams, and the thinning of half-inch-thick flanges to almost razor-sharpness in the World Trade Center 7 steel. The New York Times called this ‘ the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.’ ” [10]

None of this was addressed in any of the NIST reports. International experts weren’t consulted either, despite their reservations about NIST conclusions. Even their very own former head of the Fire Science Division of NIST and one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, Dr. James Quintiere Ph.D., called for an independent review of the World Trade Centre Twin Tower collapse investigation and referring to the NIST investigation: “I wish that there would be a peer review of this, I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view. … I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable.”

WTC 7

Image source: FOIA documents release 16

Kamal S. Obeid, a structural engineer, with a master’s degree in Engineering from UC Berkeley, of Fremont, California, stated: “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.” [11]

One of Europe’s top demolition experts was Dutch-born Danny Jowenko. His reaction to seeing WTC7 collapse was shown in a widely seen video. Before being told that it was the WTC 7 building that he was seeing, Jowenko was in no doubt whatsoever that what he was watching “…was a controlled demolition carried out by a team of experts.” [12] When he is informed that the collapse happened on September 11th later that very same day, his shock is palpable. The demolition expert asked repeatedly “De zelfde dag??” (The same day?) As the video of the collapse plays out Jowenko searched for an explanation and told his interviewer that someone must have wired the whole WTC towers for demolition in a few hours though it is clear his facial expression and body language shows that he doesn’t really believe it himself. When the interviewer informed him that FEMA excluded the possibility of a controlled demolition as an explanation for WTC7’s collapse it is then that Jowenko begins to process what this means. [13]

WTC 7 aftermath

Image source: FOIA documents release 13

In a later 2006, telephone interview with journalist Jeff Hill, Jowenko was convinced that there was a cover up and that a highly sophisticated controlled demolition did in fact, take place. The fear and self-censorship related to the issue is the deciding factor. Here is a small snippet of the entire interview:

Jeff Hill: Are you still sticking by your comments where you say it must have been a controlled demolition?

Danny Jowenko: Absolutely.

Jeff Hill: Yes? So, you as being a controlled demolitions expert, you’ve looked at the building, you’ve looked at the video and you’ve determined with your expertise that –

Danny Jowenko: I looked at the drawings, the construction and it couldn’t be done by fire. So, no, absolutely not.

Jeff Hill: OK, ’cause I was reading on the Internet, people were asking about you and they said, I wonder — I heard something that Danny Jowenko retracted his statement of what he said earlier about World Trade Center 7 now saying that it came down by fire. I said, “There’s no way that’s true.”

danny-jowenko.jpg

“Jowenko gained further notoriety when former Director of Studies at the US Army War College, Dr. Alan Sabrosky, said in a radio interview in 2010, that his skepticism of the official 911 story was prompted by Jowenko’s testimony. Jowenko’s death comes three days after Sabrosky gave an exclusive interview to PressTV in which he again reiterated his belief, which he says is common knowledge in some intelligence circles, that elements within both the CIA and Israeli Mossad planned 911. Dr. Sabrosky holds the General of the Army Douglas MacArthur Chair of Research at US Army War College.” – ‘Danny Jowenko is Dead, 3 Days After Sabrosky Interview Implicates CIA/Mossad in 911

Danny Jowenko: No, no, no, absolutely not.

Jeff Hill: ‘Cause if anybody was — Like when I called Controlled Demolition here in North America, they tell me that , “Oh, it’s possible it came down from fire” and this and that and stuff like that –.

Danny Jowenko: When the FEMA makes a report that it came down by fire, and you have to earn your money in the States as a controlled demolition company and you say, “No, it was a controlled demolition”, you’re gone. You know?

Jeff Hill: Yeah, exactly, you’ll be in a lot of trouble if you say that, right?

Danny Jowenko: Of course, of course. That’s the end of your — the end of the story.

Jeff Hill: Yeah, ’cause I was calling demolitions companies just to ask them if they used the term, “Pull it” in demolition terms and even Controlled Demolitions, Incorporated said they did. But the other people wouldn’t — didn’t want to talk to me about Building 7 really because obviously ’cause they knew what happened and they didn’t want to say it.

Danny Jowenko: Exactly. [14]

Danny Jowenko died mysteriously in a car accident in July 2011.

When the Twin Towers remains were rapidly sold off to scrap merchants the exact same thing happened to the rubble of Building 7 with safety protocol and crime scene forensics ignored. Building 7 was destined for the blast furnaces by high level directives. All the clues as to why such as powerful building would just decide to collapse vanished with the scrap merchants, to be melted down so that nothing would ever be traceable. Unlike the Twin Towers, everyone had been evacuated so there was no reason not to document and catalogue each piece for further study. And since the collapse neatly conformed to a text book demolition other streets were relatively untouched providing easy access and a reduced possibility of disruption to the immediate area.

Along with family members, safety officials and just about anyone paying attention, Dr. Frederick W. Mowrer, an associate professor in the Fire Protection Engineering Department at the University of Maryland, added his voice to the actions of FEMA claiming: “I find the speed with which potentially important evidence has been removed and recycled to be appalling.” [15]

Which brings us to WTC owner Mr. Larry Silverstein, who must have been positively jumping for joy at the supernatural “luck” he enjoyed on September 11.

 


Notes

[1] Gilsanz, Ramon, Edward M. DePaola, Christopher Marrion, and Harold ‘Bud’ Nelson (May 2002). ‘WTC7 (Chapter 5)’ (PDF). World Trade Center Building Performance Study. FEMA.
[2] BBC Conspiracy Files: “9/11 – The Third Tower.” June 7 2008. | ‘The Survivors inside the Towers “they scrambled”’ By paul Vallely, The Independent, September 13, 2001.
[3] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uso9sCOakEQ. Starts at 2:05 into the video; ends at the 3:40.
[4] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STbD9XMCOho
[5] This is excluding the Penthouse residing on the top floor of WTC 7 which began to collapse before the primary structure and should be taken as a separate entity in itself as Mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti describes: “The WTC 7 East penthouse had columns on its perimeter and none in its interior. On three sides these columns mounted near the edge of the roof of WTC 7. It is unlikely that a collapse of any core columns of the main building could have pulled them completely down without the roof beams breaking completely loose from the exterior columns and moving down completely also. It is unlikely that the roof beams were severed from the exterior columns, which is what would be necessary for a core collapse to cause the penthouse to collapse.”
[6] NIST WTC 7 Technical Briefing, August 26, 2008. http://www.911speakout.org/NIST_Tech_Briefing_Transcript.pdf Transcript p.16
[7] ‘Undisputed Facts Point to the Controlled Demolition of WTC 7’ By Richard Gage, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth March 28, 2008.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] op. cit Roberts
[12] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DRhwRN06I
[13] Ibid.
[14] Danny Jowenko: – Proprietor, Jowenko Explosieve Demolitie B.V., a European demolition and construction company, with offices in the Netherlands. Founded 1980, Jowenko Explosive Demolition is certified and holds permits to comply with the Dutch Explosives for Civil Use Act and the German Explosives Act. Jowenko’s explosives engineers also hold the German Certificate of Qualifications and the European Certificate for Shotfiring issued by The European Federation of Explosive Engineers. | Telephone interview with Jeff Hill 2/22/07 http://www.patriotsquestion911.com /engineers.html | For mp3 recording of telephone conversation go to: http://www.pumpitout.com/audio/danny_jowenko_022207.mp3.
[15] ‘Experts Urging Broader Inquiry in Towers’ Fall,’ New York Times, December 25, 2001.