Untitled Document
Taking a Closer Look at the Stories Ignored by the Corporate Media
Donate | Fair Use Notice | Who We Are | Contact

All News
Disaster in New Orleans
Government / The Elite
Human Rights
International Affairs
Iraq War
London Bombing
Police State / Military
Science / Health
Voting Integrity
War on Terrorism

All Commentaries
Government / The Elite
Iraq War
Police State / Military
Science / Health
Voting Integrity
War on Terrorism

Advanced Search
View the Archives

E-mail this Link   Printer Friendly

9-11 -

9/11 an Inside Job

Posted in the database on Sunday, September 17th, 2006 @ 14:06:45 MST (15665 views)
from bogusstory.com  

Untitled Document

In the wake of revelations of murderous deception in the Iraq War carried out by the Bush Administration, more and more Americans are asking questions regarding the basis for the US “War on Terror”.

Half of New Yorkers believe US leaders had foreknowledge of impending 9-11 attacks and consciously failed to act; 66% call for new probe of unanswered questions by congress or New York’s Attorney General, see Zogby, and thousands of Americans have signed a petition for a new probe.

A poll shows 89% of CNN Internet users feel this way and over 63% of Canadians feel similarly. On the 3 year anniversary of the 9/11 attacks 80% Al-Arabia satellite TV viewers thought others, besides Bin Ladin, were behind 9/11.

People worldwide began their own investigations. I especially like Prof. Steven E. Jones, Mike Ruppert, Prof. David Griffin, Eric Blumrich, Roedy Green and of course this article. Very little if any of the information in these articles was disclosed by major media outside of Manhattan, although most of the information contained herein has been fact-checked by multiple newspapers and researchers.

On September 12, 2005 (4 years after 9/11) the Bush Administration released a less redacted version of the Kean Commission Staff Monograph. This report provides some details on the Official Theory but does not contradict or address the observations brought up in this article or other 9/11 articles mentioned above.

The Official Conspiracy Theory is Fraudulent and Unbelievable

"The 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon were far more elaborate, precise and destructive than any of [the] earlier assaults [by Al Qaeda]."
July 22, 2004 The 9/11 Commission Report

The Official Story is 19 Al-Qaeda terrorists, headed by Mohammed Atta, conspired to hijack 4 planes and fly them into the World Trade Center - South Tower and North Tower buildings and the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

We are told these 9/11 terrorists were ultimately directed and sponsored by Osama bin Laden, a wealthy anti-American Saudi businessman who associates with Taliban drug lords in Afghanistan. However Osama bin Laden denies any involvement. Furthermore, it appears a confession video tape, provided by the CIA and broadcast nationwide, is fraudulent, see Fabricated Osama tapes.

The day after the attack FBI director Robert Mueller stated: “We have in the last 24 hours, taken the passenger manifests ... and have successfully, I believe, identified many of the hijackers on each of the four flights that went down.” However amazingly the Bush Administration decided on the day of the attack that Bin Laden was to take the blame and ABC News began reporting it as such by 11 AM on 9/11. This is more amazing given that very little is known about the 9/11 terrorists other than they recently entered the U.S. as students and took some flying lessons. In fact there are still numerous discrepencies as to which hijackers are alive or dead.

After many years, very little evidence linking Bin Laden to 9/11 has surfaced and a great deal of controversy surrounding US involvement in the creation of the al Qaeda terrorist network, see Janes.com and GlobalResearch.ca.

The Bush administration also stated their belief that cells of Al-Qaeda existed in Iraq and since Iraq has “weapons of mass destruction” and is a “gathering threat to the U.S.”, the U.S. needs to, as a last resort, pre-emptively invade Iraq. All these beliefs turned out to be without basis in fact and the conclusions were outrageous lies.

For more on the Official Conspiracy Theory, see the recently released Kean Commission Staff Monograph.

Pentagon impact not a Boeing 757 (AA flight 77)

The various eye witness accounts have suffered from interpretation errors and changing stories, see Gerard Holmgren. Luckily the Pentagon is a military installation surrounded by numerous live video cameras which should have definitively recorded the approaching airspace intruder/target. In fact, the Sheraton National Hotel, the Nexcomm/Citgo gas station and the Virginia Department of Transportation cameras had bird’s eye views of what would have hit the Pentagon. The public video tapes were confiscated by government officials and no video tape has been released to the public that conclusively shows what hit the Pentagon. The FBI claims it has reviewed 84 videos that showed no Flight 77 impact.

The TV media primarily showed us pictures after the outer wall of the Pentagon collapsed some 20 minutes after initial impact. Here is a picture of the Pentagon’s final damage: .

Here is a picture prior to the outer wall collapse: .

Later photos show the initial impact caused an approx. 16 foot hole near the bottom of the 5-story Pentagon outer wall with no visible Boeing 757 plane wreckage on the lawn of the Pentagon:

According to a collision simulation performed at cs.purdue.edu, a Boeing 757 fuselage travelling at 545 MPH could liquefy on impact and disappear into the entry point. However the study did not address how a 124 foot wide Boeing 757 could disappear into the 16-foot hole: .

None of the Atta terrorists were considered good pilots, see amateurs. How can suicidal amateur pilots “precision fly” a Boeing 757 to hit the 5-story Pentagon, so close to the ground, going at 545 MPH?

Although some plane wreckage parts were displayed, they were not large enough for a Boeing 757.

For a Flash presentation with more information, see Pentagate.

Fire did not collapse steel World Trade Center towers

The official National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) story is that the impact scrapped off fireproofing from the massive steel beams of the WTC tower(s) and the subsequent office fires softened the steel enough to initiate their collapse. The NIST analysis does not produce a simulation or visualization of the collapses or explain how the steel beams gave way, unilaterally and simultaneously throughout the gigantic structures, pulverized concrete in mid-air, and caused total destruction at nearly freefall speeds in a virtually symmetric collapse.

Similar office tower fires in Philadelphia in 1991 and Madrid in 2005 did not bring down those buildings and in earthquake situations, steel towers have toppeled over but never pulverized, see research by Prof. Steven E. Jones.

Large quantities of iron or steel were found beneath the towers still molten weeks after 911:

The temperature-induced coloration of this molten metal indicates 1450oF to 1975oF (790oC to 1080oC).

Many scientists and engineers have stated that jet fuel and the resulting office fires at the WTCs cannot come close to generating these air temperatures or to heat the enormous steel beams to these temperatures, see Scientific community1, Scientific community2 and Scholars for 911 Truth. The enormous steel frame and center beams dissipate heat throughout the structure, see image of steel frame during 1966-1972 construction:

Nearly a year after 9/11/01 an audio tape of firefighter communications was finally released to the public. No firefighters reported out of control fires. In fact, firefighters reported they were eyewitnesses to fact much of the fire caused by burning jet fuel had by then largely burned out and indicated that conditions were controllable. See also video footage of firefighter conversations.

The Kean Commission Staff Monograph has revealed that the commercial jetliners could be programmed to fly automatically to the World Trade Centers, however only with the aide of secret entry codes. If this is how the planes were guided, it appears only an insider could have provided these entry codes to the terrorists.

Close US Gov Ties with Terrorists

According to published and confirmed mainstream reports Mohammed Atta, whom the Pentagon had knowledge of in the middle of 2000, was wired $100,000 by the Pakistani intelligence agency, the ISI, just prior to the attacks. The man who approved this wire, General Ahmad was meeting with top officials of the US government, including Intelligence Committee Chairmen Porter Goss (R-FL) and Senator Bob Graham (D-FL) on the morning of the 9/11 attacks. The FBI confirmed on ABC News (This Week, September 30, 2001) that the payment had come from banks in Pakistan. Amidst the scandal that linked him to the payment, ISI director-general Lt-Gen Mahmud Ahmad was retired early by Pakistan’s Military Dictator Musharraf, see Pakistan's ISI, FBI pressures resignation, Gen. Ahmad background, Scoop, Arrest of Ahmad's ISI agent, ABCNEWS summary and Pakistan harbors Bin Laden just before 9/11/01 .

The Bush family has close ties to the Bin Laden family through their shared business concerns in the Carlyle Group, the 11th largest US defense contractor. The Bush administration was accused of interfering with the FBI investigation of a brother of Osama in U.S. custody who had suspected dealings with Al-Qaeda and allowing him to escape the U.S., but yet detaining thousands of other Arab Americans in Guantanamo Bay. Senator Kerry also accused Bush of outsourcing the capture of Osama Bin Laden and as a result allowing Osama to escape when he was cornered in Tora Bora, see escape1 and escape2.

To this day, neither Saudi Arabia nor Pakistan have been placed on the list of countries sponsoring terrorism. To the contrary, subsequent to 9/11, Pakistan received Billions in aide from the Bush Administration including the sale of F-16 fighter aircraft, see Pakistan1 and Pakistan2.

Presidential complicity

Intelligence was tipped that Osama Bin Laden was preparing to possibly crash a plane loaded with explosives into George W. Bush’s hotel at the July 2001 Summit of G-8 nations in Genoa, Italy. In response the organizers of the G-8 Summit installed anti-aircraft batteries. In spite of a subsequent memo, “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”, neither New York nor the Pentagon had functioning anti-aircraft weapons. The New York Times confirmed that the Whitehouse was warned by numerous foreign agencies and allies that an attack was imminent.

Guilty Demeanor

Bush stated: “Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government’s emergency response plans.”

Somehow his emergency response plans allowed for Bush and his secret service(!) to continue on to a classroom visit in Sarasota Florida without fear of being the next target or interest in being involved in our defense.

Obstruction of Justice

The White House was often cited as having attempted to block the release of information to the commission and for refusing to give interviews without tight conditions attached, see something-to-hide1 & something-to-hide2. While Bush and Cheney did ultimately agree to testify, they did so only under the conditions that they would not testify under oath and there would not be any transcription for the record or any publicly available record of what they said.

The Bush administration to this day has not publicly released the FBI report or CIA report on the government failures of 9/11, nor the flight recorders of the 9/11 planes, nor the security tapes of the Pentagon crash. It was recently revealed that the Pentagon had knowledge of Atta's US-based Al-Quada cell in the middle of 2000 and subsequently covered it up from the 9/11 commission.

The Bush administration first tried to appoint Henry Kissinger (who was recently exposed to have been involved in overthrowing Chile’s president Allende and the subsequent cover-up) as the head of the 9/11 commission. After great outrage from the families of the 9/11 victims, Kissinger resigned. Bush then appointed the "bi-partisan" and "pro-Bush" Kean commission which presumed the Bush administration’s story instead of independently solving the crime.

The White House have been accused of attempting to derail the commission further by giving it one of the smallest independent commission funding levels in recent history ( $3 million) and by starting the commission’s investigation 441 days after the tragedy and releasing most details 4 years after 9/11! Most of the physical evidence was quickly secured, removed and recycled, and therefore not available for independent investigation.

The Bush Administration are also defendants in a RICO lawsuit filed by some of the victims of the 9/11 disaster, see RICO1 and RICO2. The prosecutors have stated an obvious conflict of interest for the President to have any involvement in the creation or outcome of a 9/11 investigation.

Means: Deliberate weakening of US Air Defenses

"...none of the measures adopted by the U.S. government from 1998 to 2001 disturbed or even delayed the progress of the al Qaeda plot."
July 22, 2004 The 9/11 Commission Report

The Bush administration’s 9/11 story has changed numerous times ( Bush falsehoods on 9/11) prior to the release of the 9/11 Commission Report.

US Air Defense Interceptors Fail

"Existing [FAA and NORAD] protocols on 9/11 were unsuited in every respect for an attack in which hijacked planes were used as weapons."
July 22, 2004 The 9/11 Commission Report

The Bush administration claimed there were no pre-existing Air Defenses to prevent 9/11 and that subsequent to 9/11, the FAA got their procedures figured out and NORAD got better funding, see US Air Defense post-9/11.

This flies in the face of actual FAA standing operating procedures: FAA Emergency Situations, FAA Emergency Determinations, FAA Air Defense Liaison Officers, FAA Escort of Hijacked Aircraft and Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) and Destruction of Derelict Airborne Objects.

The summary of these procedures is simply as follows: All commercial flights must log their flight plans with the FAA prior to departure. If a commercial airliner is off course by 2 miles or out of contact for 10 minutes, FAA contacts NORAD to automatically scramble fighter aircraft to intercept.

The Air Guard has a mandate to intercept wayward planes independent of the FAA, see Pre-9/11 Air National Guard Mission Statement. Since G.W. Bush served in the Texas Air National Guard, he would be intimately familar with these operations.

According to the FAA between 09/00 and 06/01 the standing operating procedure successfully launched NORAD fighters on 67 occasions to escort wayward aircraft. The FAA also claims to have informed NORAD in a timely manner on 9/11.

Had they followed this procedure on 9/11/01, the first hijacked plane would have been intercepted before hitting the World Trade Center. Instead fighter planes were scrambled at 9:24 am, 34 minutes after the third plane veered off course and headed towards Washington, and after both the first and second towers were hit. For more on this timeline see: COOP, or see the succinct Clarity Flash video presentation.

Prof. David Griffin has researched the anti-aircraft systems at the Pentagon and reports that they are designed to automatically shoot down any approaching derelict airborne objects that are not transmitting a military transponder signal. A year after 9/11, the Pentagon beefed up their anti-aircraft systems, see Clear Skies II.

Finally in December 2003, the mainstream press reported that Air Defense procedures were in place to prevent 9/11, see 9/11 was preventable.

However instead of a reprimand, General Richard Myers, who was in command of NORAD on 9/11/01, was subsequently promoted to Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Bush administration continues to this day to deny that 9/11 was preventable by then-existing procedures and budgets.

Shoot-down Order?

"Planes were scrambled, but ineffectively, as they did not know where to go or what targets they were to intercept."
July 22, 2004 The 9/11 Commission Report

Many Air Defense bases existed within reach the Pentagon and New York.

Cheney apparently gave the order to shoot down the fourth hijacked plane between 10:10 and 10:15 am after the plane had already crashed in Pennsylvania.

Alternatively, Robert Ayling, a former boss of British Airways, suggested that [jumbo 757] aircraft could have been commandeered from the ground and controlled remotely in the event of a hijack. The 9/11 Commission Report does not talk about what happened to this option.

September 11, 2001 (War games Day!)

"In pursuing our mandate, we have reviewed more than 2.5 million pages of documents and interviewed more than 1,200 individuals in ten countries. This included nearly every senior official from the current and previous administrations who had responsibility for topics covered in our mandate... From the outset, we have been committed to share as much of our investigation as we can with the American people."
July 22, 2004 The 9/11 Commission Report

The 9/11 Commission Report did not reveal anything about war games occurring on September 11, 2001. However National Reconnaissance Office scheduled an exercise drill on September 11, 2001 in which an errant aircraft crashes into one of its buildings. On the morning of the real 9/11 attacks! Associated Press got this story from a 2002 Homeland Security Conference held in Chicago.

NORAD had regularly simulated a hijacked airliner crashing into a building and believes it is part of their responsibility to defend against these situations.

In fact during the morning of 9/11 four U.S. sponsored war games were taking place, some involving “live-fly” exercises where actual aircraft were simulating the behavior of hijacked airliners in real life.

Was this what paralyzed the FAA, NORAD and the Air Defense fighter pilots? General Myers said to the contrary the exercises enhanced our response:

Sec. of Defense Rumsfeld in House Hearing on FY06 Dept. of Defense Budget

Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (D-GA): The question was, we had four war games going on September 11th, and the question that I tried to pose before the Secretary had to go to lunch was whether or not the activities of the four war games going on September 11th actually impaired our ability to respond to the attacks.

Gen. Richard Myers: The answer to the question is no, it did not impair our response, in fact General Eberhart who was in the command of the North American Aerospace Defense Command as he testified in front of the 9/11 Commission I believe - I believe he told them that it enhanced our ability to respond, given that NORAD didn’t have the overall responsibility for responding to the attacks that day. That was an FAA responsibility. But they were two CPXs; there was one Department of Justice exercise that didn’t have anything to do with the other three; and there was an actual operation ongoing because there was some Russian bomber activity up near Alaska. So we -

Cynthia McKinney: Let me ask you this, then: who was in charge of managing those war games?

Chairman Hunter (R-CA): General, why don’t you give the best answer that you can here in a short a period of time and we’ll - the gentle lady wants to get a written answer anyway, and then we can move on to other folks.

General Myers: The important thing to realize is that North American Aerospace Defense Command was responsible. These are command post exercises; what that means is that all the battle positions that are normally not filled are indeed filled; so it was an easy transition from an exercise into a real world situation. It actually enhanced the response; otherwise, it would take somewhere between 30 minutes and a couple of hours to fill those positions, those battle stations, with the right staff officers.

Taken from House Hearing Video and Transcript. You can also see this questioning from C-span. See also War Games for more details.

These exercises very much contradict Condoleezza Rice's testimony that nobody could have imagined using planes as missiles. Furthermore, US defense department insider Timothy McNiven has testified with a lie detector that the exact 9/11 scenario as it occurred in New York was devised by the US government in 1976 at the request of the Congress for the purpose of strengthing our defenses against such an attack.

Motive - "It's the Money, Honey!"

Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 movie and reader have made convincing arguments showing how Bush’s “War on Terror” had the benefit of US control of oil in Iraq and the US ownership of an oil pipeline through Afghanistan.

Launching these wars has also helped justify the $420 Billion and growing annual budgets of the Pentagon and the approximately $80 Billion supplemental war appropriations each year. Companies like Halliburton, Kellog Brown and Root and all the defense contractors including the Carlyle Group are “making a killing”.

There are also interesting arguments to show US Government involvement in the Drug Trade, similar to the Iran-Contra affair: CIA-ISI Drug connection and Guns-Oil-Drugs (G.O.D.).

Bush Government Signatories on World Domination Agenda

Project for the New American Century (PNAC) is a neo-conservative think-tank that promotes an ideology of total U.S. world domination through the use of force. The group embraces and disseminates an ideology of faith in force, U.S. supremacy, and rejection of the rule of law in international affairs.

The group’s core ideas are expressed in a September 2000 report produced for Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush, and Lewis Libby entitled Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century. The Sunday Herald referred to the report as a “blueprint for U.S. world domination.”

PNAC’s membership includes people such as Richard Perle, Elliot Abrams, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, and William Kristol. See Old American Century for more details.

It is also evident that most of the Kean Commission recommendations fit nicely into the Joint Military Vision for 2020 which inturn fits nicely into the PNAC plan.

Historical Precedent for Attacking Own Country Prior to Invasion

Proponents of this theory often point to historical precedents, in which governments have allegedly planned to use tragedy in order to gain support for unpopular policies. Jones and others draw parallels between these precedents and the use of 9/11 to justify the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Great fire of Rome, in 64 AD, which some historians believe to have been set by then emperor Nero, so as to have a pretext to persecute the Christian minority.

The Reichstag fire of 1933 is widely believed to have been started by the Nazis in order to garner popular support. Definitive proof of direct responsibility by the Nazis has yet to be discovered, but many feel that they are the most likely the guilty party, based on motive, circumstantial evidence, other murderous deception carried out by the Nazis, and the lack of credible evidence against anyone else.

Pearl Harbor, which is referred to by the Project for the New American Century as a prototypical "Catalyzing Event" seen as necessary to the “process of transformation” of the US into a stronger worldwide power. Robert Stinnet, in his popular book “Day of Deceit”, presents evidence that the US government had advance knowledge of that attack, which propelled the nation into World War II.

The Operation Northwoods documents, drafted by members of the US government in the 1960’s (recently released under the Freedom of Information Act), include recommendations to destroy an unmanned drone and claim that it was a commercial plane “full of college students off on a holiday,” in order to align public opinion against Cuba.

Allegedly “unprovoked” attacks, which the North Vietnamese allegedly carried out on U.S. naval vessels in 1964 in the Gulf of Tonkin incident were used by Lyndon Johnson to convince the U.S. Congress to pass the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, which led to the escalation of U.S. military involvement in Vietnam. Squadron commander James Stockdale, who was flying air cover above the vessels at the time, says that no North Vietnamese attack occurred at all.

Additional Reading / Viewing

If the reader remains doubtful, please note that almost every assertion in this article has a link to a more detailed report. I would especially recommend the following:

Prof. David Griffin's New Pearl Harbor * Air Defenses flash video * Pentagate flash video * Government Insider Says Bush Authorized 9/11 Attacks * Painful Deceptions film shown on Manhattan TV * NY 911 Truth

Defense rests

The defense would not like to present any new information on the grounds that it might jeapordize national security.

The defense would like to point out that the prosecution cannot explain all the details of how the defense supposedly committed the crime. In other words they have no idea as to who did what, when and how. The lack of these details should create reasonable doubt in the minds of the readers. You wouldn’t want to convict a president based on circumstantial evidence alone, now would ya?


From the above disclosures, the Bush Administration must have approved of the attacks on the WTC and Pentagon on 9/11/01, and without whose assistance the attacks would not have been possible. Atta and company were co-conspirators and officially took the blame. This conclusion is based on an overwhelming set of otherwise unlikely coincidences. In the author’s opinion this theory is proved beyond a reasonable doubt. However if the reader does not feel so, at the very least, there is enough evidence to call for an end to the US “War on Terror”.


View videos at Looking Glass News

Painful Deceptions

Loose Change: 2nd Edition

Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime 1.0

Video: 911 Eyewitness

“Confronting the Evidence: 9/11 and the Search for Truth”

Are the Criminals Frightened?

All "911" Videos

Go to Original Article >>>

The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of Looking Glass News. Click the disclaimer link below for more information.
Email: editor@lookingglassnews.org.

E-mail this Link   Printer Friendly

Untitled Document
Donate | Fair Use Notice | Who We Are | Contact
Copyright 2005 Looking Glass News.