Twenty-five U.S. Military Officers Challenge Official Account of 9/11
This article, which appears on opednews.come, was brought to my attention by Morley. It provides a strong statement in support of the notion, discussed here on NSB recently (and previously, too), that the truth about the 9/11 attacks is something other than what we American have officially been told.
If one assumes that all these individuals, and their reported backgrounds, are genuine this piece certainly gets one’s attention. And I know of no reason to doubt their genuineness. (I can personally vouch for only one of them –Karen Kwiatkowski– on whose radio program I have appeared twice, and know by reputation one other–Scott Ritter. The little bit I know lends credence to the report as a whole.
Some of the people draw conclusions that seem to be outside their areas of expertise. But there are many other points made articulated by people who seem in a good position to make such judgments.
This group of twenty-five does raise the question: why, of all the former U.S. military officers, this particular twenty-five? Are they smarter, braver, more possessed of relevant knowledge? Is there some other kind of explanation of why these people, out of all the presumably thousands of people with kindred backgrounds in the United States? It does not appear that they all would share a kindred political agenda. And for that reason, but not that reason alone, I am impressed by this testimony.
**********************************
Twenty-five U.S. Military Officers Challenge Official Account of 9/11
by
Alan Miller
January 14, 2008 — Twenty-five former U.S. military officers have severely criticized the official account of 9/11 and called for a new investigation. They include former commander of U.S. Army Intelligence, Major General Albert Stubblebine, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Col. Ronald D. Ray, two former staff members of the Director of the National Security Agency; Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, and Major John M. Newman, PhD, and many others. They are among the rapidly growing number of military and intelligence service veterans, scientists, engineers, and architects challenging the government’s story. The officers’ statements appear below, listed alphabetically.
Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD
A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash. It’s impossible,” said Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret). [1] With doctoral degrees in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Col. Bowman served as Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.
There’s a second group of facts having to do with the cover up,” continued Col. Bowman. Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who’s responsible. Who gained from 9/11? Who covered up crucial information about 9/11? And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place? When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.”
Regarding the failure of NORAD to intercept the four hijacked planes on 9/11, Col. Bowman said, I’m an old interceptor pilot. I know the drill. I’ve done it. I know how long it takes. I know the rules. … Critics of the government story on 9/11 have said: ‘Well, they knew about this, and they did nothing’. That’s not true. If our government had done nothing that day and let normal procedure be followed, those planes, wherever they were, would have been intercepted, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive.” [2]
During his 22-year Air Force career, Col. Bowman also served as the Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology. He also flew over 100 combat missions in Viet Nam as a fighter pilot.
Lt. Jeff Dahlstrom
Former U.S. Air Force pilot Lt. Jeff Dahlstrom wrote in a 2007 statement to this author, When 9/11 occurred I bought the entire government and mainstream media story line. I was a lifelong conservative Republican that voted for Bush/Cheney, twice. Curiosity about JFK’s death, after a late night TV re-run of Oliver Stone’s movie, got me started researching and digging for the truth about his assassins.
My research led me to a much more important and timely question: the mystery of what really did happen on 9/11. Everything that seemed real, turned out to be false. The US government and the news media, once again, were lying to the world about the real terrorists and the public murder of 2,972 innocents on 9/11.
The ‘Patriot Act’ was actually written prior to 9/11 with the intention of destroying the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. It was passed by Congress, based upon the government’s myth of 9/11, which was in reality a staged hoax. 9/11 was scripted and executed by rogue elements of the military, FAA, intelligence, and private contractors working for the US government.
In addition to severely curtailing fundamental rights of Americans, the 9/11 crime was then used by this administration, the one I originally voted for and supported, to justify waging two preemptive wars (and most likely a third war), killing over 4,500 American soldiers, and killing over one million innocent Afghan and Iraqi people.
It was all premeditated. Treason, a false flag military operation, and betrayal of the trust of the American people were committed on 9/11 by the highest levels of the US government and not one person responsible for the crimes, or the cover-up, has been held accountable for the last six years.
After reading fifteen well-researched books, studying eight or nine DVD documentaries, and devoting months of personal research and investigation, I have arrived at one ultimate conclusion: The American government and the US Constitution have been hijacked and subverted by a group of criminals that today are the real terrorists. They are in control of the US government and they have all violated their oaths of office and committed treason against their own citizens.”
Capt. Daniel Davis
Capt. Daniel Davis is a former U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director. After his military service, Capt. Davis served for 15 years as a Senior Manager at General Electric Turbine (jet) Engine Division and then devoted an additional 15 years as founder and CEO of Turbine Technology Services Corp., a turbine (jet engine) services and maintenance company.
In a statement to this author, Capt. Davis wrote, As a former General Electric Turbine engineering specialist and manager and then CEO of a turbine engineering company, I can guarantee that none of the high tech, high temperature alloy engines on any of the four planes that crashed on 9/11 would be completely destroyed, burned, shattered or melted in any crash or fire. Wrecked, yes, but not destroyed. Where are all of those engines, particularly at the Pentagon? If jet powered aircraft crashed on 9/11, those engines, plus wings and tail assembly, would be there.”
Decorated with the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal for bravery under fire and the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam, Capt. Davis also served in the Army Air Defense Command as Nike Missile Battery Control Officer for the Chicago-Milwaukee Defense Area.
Capt. Davis continued, Additionally, in my experience as an officer in NORAD as a Tactical Director for the Chicago-Milwaukee Air Defense and as a current private pilot, there is no way that an aircraft on instrument flight plans (all commercial flights are IFR) would not be intercepted when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders, or stop communication with Air Traffic Control. No way! With very bad luck, perhaps one could slip by, but no there’s no way all four of them could!
Finally, going over the hill and highway and crashing into the Pentagon right at the wall/ground interface is difficult for even a small slow single engine airplane and no way for a 757. Maybe the best pilot in the world could accomplish that but not these unskilled ‘terrorists’. Attempts to obscure facts by calling them a ‘Conspiracy Theory’ does not change the truth. It seems, ‘Something is rotten in the State’.”
Major Jon I. Fox is a former U.S. Marine Corps fighter pilot and a retired commercial airline pilot for Continental Airlines with a 35-year commercial aviation career. In 2007, in support of the Architects and Engineers[3] petition to reinvestigate 9/11, he wrote, On hearing the military (NORAD/NEAD) excuses for no intercepts on 9/11/2001, I knew from personal experience that they were lying. I then began re-checking other evidence and found mostly more lies from the ‘official spokesmen’. Jet fuel fires at atmospheric pressure do not get hot enough to weaken steel. Structures do not collapse through themselves in free fall time with only gravity as the powering force.” [4]
Commander Ralph Kolstad
Retired U.S. Navy ‘Top Gun’ pilot Commander Ralph Kolstad started questioning the official account of 9/11 within days of the event. In a statement to this author, he wrote, It just didn’t make any sense to me,” he said. And now six years after 9/11 he says, When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official story.” [5]
Commander Kolstad was a top-rated fighter pilot during his 20-year Navy career. Early in his career, he was accorded the honor of being selected to participate in the Navy’s ‘Top Gun’ air combat school, officially known as the U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School. The Tom Cruise movie Top Gun” reflects the experience of the young Navy pilots at the school. Eleven years later, Commander Kolstad was further honored by being selected to become a ‘Top Gun’ adversary instructor.
Commander Kolstad had a second career after his 20 years of Navy active and reserve service and served as a commercial airline pilot for 27 years, flying for American Airlines and other domestic and international careers. He flew Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100 airliners. He has flown a total of over 23,000 hours in his career.
Commander Kolstad is especially critical of the account of American Airlines Flight 77 that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon. He says, At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757′s and 767′s and I could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.”
Commander Kolstad adds, I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!”
He points to the physical evidence at the Pentagon impact site and asks in exasperation, Where is the damage to the wall of the Pentagon from the wings? Where are the big pieces that always break away in an accident? Where is all the luggage? Where are the miles and miles of wire, cable, and lines that are part and parcel of any large aircraft? Where are the steel engine parts? Where is the steel landing gear? Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?”
But no major element of the official account of 9/11 is spared from Commander Kolstad’s criticism. Regarding the alleged impact site of United Airlines Flight 93 near Shanksville, PA, he asks, Where is any of the wreckage? Of all the pictures I have seen, there is only a hole! Where is any piece of a crashed airplane? Why was the area cordoned off, and no inspection allowed by the normal accident personnel? Where is any evidence at all?”
Commander Kolstad also questions many aspects of the attack on the World Trade Center. How could a steel and concrete building collapse after being hit by a Boeing 767? Didn’t the engineers design it to withstand a direct hit from a Boeing 707, approximately the same size and weight of the 767? The evidence just doesn’t add up.”
Why did the second building collapse before the first one, which had been burning for 20 minutes longer after a direct hit, especially when the second one hit was just a glancing blow? If the fire was so hot, then why were people looking out the windows [6] and in the destroyed areas? Why have so many members of the New York Fire Department reported seeing or hearing many ‘explosions’ before the buildings collapsed?”
Commander Kolstad summarized his frustration with the investigation and disbelief of the official account of 9/11, If one were to act as an accident investigator, one would look at the evidence, and then construct a plausible scenario as to what led to the accident. In this case, we were told the story and then the evidence was built to support the story. What happened to any intelligent investigation? Every question leads to another question that has not been answered by anyone in authority. This is just the beginning as to why I don’t believe the official ‘story’ and why I want the truth to be told.”
Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski
A Pentagon eye-witness and a former member of the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency, Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret), is a severe critic of the official account of 9/11. A contributing author to the 2006 book 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out, she wrote, I believe the [9/11] Commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research.”
She continued, It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics.”
Col. Kwiatkowski was working in the Pentagon on 9/11 in her capacity as Political-Military Affairs Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense when Flight 77 allegedly hit the Pentagon. She wrote, There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the Secretary of Defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a ‘missile.’ [7] [Secretary Rumsfeld also publicly referred to Flight 93 as the plane that was "shot down" over Pennsylvania.[8] ]
I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact – no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. … [A]ll of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.
The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. … But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.
The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. … More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day.”
The improbability of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 is a major concern of these officers and a growing number of scientists, engineers and architects. The building was 610 feet tall, 47 stories, and would have been the tallest building in 33 states. Although it was not hit by an airplane, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 7 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11. In the 6 years since 9/11, the Federal government has failed to provide any explanation for the collapse. In addition to the failure to provide an explanation, absolutely no mention of Building 7′s collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission’s full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.” [Video of the collapse can be seen at http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/WTC7_Collapse.wmv ]
Lt. Col. Shelton Lankford
Lt. Col. Shelton Lankford, U.S. Marine Corps (ret), an attack pilot with over 300 combat missions, wrote in 2007 to the Michigan Daily,[9] Our government has been hijacked by means of a ‘new Pearl Harbor’ and a lot of otherwise good and decent people who are gullible enough to think that the first three steel-framed buildings in history fall down because they have some fires that the fire fighter on the scene said could be knocked down with a couple of hoses and through which people walked before they were photographed looking out the holes [10] where the plane hit. One of these, Building 7, was never hit by a plane and even NIST is ashamed to advance a reason for its collapse. And, miracle of miracles, these three buildings just happened to be leased and insured by the same guy who is on tape [11] saying they decided to ‘PULL’ the last one to fall.”
During his 20 year military career, Col. Lankford’s decorations include the Distinguished Flying Cross, and 32 awards of the Air Medal.
In a statement to this author, Col. Lankford wrote, September 11, 2001 seems destined to be the watershed event of our lives and the greatest test for our democracy in our lifetimes. The evidence of government complicity in the lead-up to the events, the failure to respond during the event, and the astounding lack of any meaningful investigation afterwards, as well as the ignoring of evidence turned up by others that renders the official explanation impossible, may signal the end of the American experiment. It has been used to justify all manners of measures to legalize repression at home and as a pretext for behaving as an aggressive empire abroad. Until we demand an independent, honest, and thorough investigation and accountability for those whose action and inaction led to those events and the cover-up, our republic and our Constitution remain in the gravest danger.”
Lt. Col. Jeff Latas
Another harsh critic of the official account of 9/11 is Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, U.S. Air Force (ret). A former combat fighter pilot, Col. Latas is currently a commercial airline pilot.
Col. Latas is a member of Pilots for 9/11 Truth. In 2007 he was interviewed by the group’s founder, commercial airline pilot, Rob Balsamo,[12] regarding the group’s documentary video, Pandora’s Black Box, Chapter 2, Flight of American 77, [13] which focuses on the 9/11 Commission’s account of the impact of Flight 77 at the Pentagon and discrepancies with the data from the Flight Data Recorder alleged by the NTSB to be from Flight 77.
In the interview, Col. Latas said, After I did my own analysis of it, it’s obvious that there’s discrepancies between the two stories; between the 9/11 Commission and the flight data recorder information. And I think that’s where we really need to focus a lot of our attention to get the help that we need in order to put pressure on government agencies to actually do a real investigation of 9/11. And not just from a security standpoint, but from even an aviation standpoint, like any accident investigation would actually help the aviators out by finding reasons for things happening.”
A highly decorated fighter pilot, Col. Latas was awarded the Distinguish Flying Cross for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals. His combat experience includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch. During his 20-year Air Force career, he also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer, as a member of the Pentagon’s Quadrennial Defense Review, and as President, U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board.
Col. Latas concluded, And I think that we Americans need to demand further investigation just to clarify the discrepancies that you’ve [Pilots for 9/11 Truth] found. And I think that we need to be getting on the phone with our Congressmen and women and letting them know that we don’t accept the excuses that we’re hearing now, that we want true investigators to do a true investigation.”
Capt. Eric H. May
Capt. Eric H. May, U.S. Army (ret), is a former Army Intelligence Officer who also served as an inspector and interpreter for the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty team. He is one of many signers of a petition [14] requesting a reinvestigation of 9/11. In 2005, he wrote: As a former Army officer, my tendency immediately after 911 was to rally ’round the colors and defend the country against what I then thought was an insidious, malicious all-Arab entity called Al-Qaida. In fact, in April of 2002, I attempted to reactivate my then-retired commission to return to serve my country in its time of peril. …
Now I view the 911 event as Professor David Griffin, author of The New Pearl Harbor, views it: as a matter that implies either
A) passive participation by the Bush White House through a deliberate stand-down of proper defense procedures that (if followed) would have led US air assets to a quick identification and confrontation of the passenger aircraft that impacted WTC 1 and WTC 2, or worse …
B) active execution of a plot by rogue elements of government, starting with the White House itself, in creating a spectacle of destruction that would lead the United States into an invasion of the Middle East …” [15]
Commander Ted Muga
Commander Ted Muga, U.S. Navy (ret), is a Navy aviator, who, after retirement, had a second career as a commercial airline pilot for Pan-Am.
In a 2007 interview on the Alex Jones Show, [16] Commander Muga stated, The maneuver at the Pentagon was just a tight spiral coming down out of 7,000 feet. And a commercial aircraft, while they can in fact structurally somewhat handle that maneuver, they are very, very, very difficult. And it would take considerable training. In other words, commercial aircraft are designed for a particular purpose and that is for comfort and for passengers and it’s not for military maneuvers. And while they are structurally capable of doing them, it takes some very, very talented pilots to do that. … I just can’t imagine an amateur even being able to come close to performing a maneuver of that nature.
And as far as hijacking the airplanes, once again getting back to the nature of pilots and airplanes, there is no way that a pilot would give up an airplane to hijackers. … I mean, hell, a guy doesn’t give up a TV remote control much less a complicated 757. And so to think that pilots would allow a plane to be taken over by a couple of 5 foot 7, 150 pound guys with a one-inch blade boxcutter is ridiculous.
And also in all four planes, if you remember, none of the planes ever switched on their transponder to the hijack code. There’s a very, very simple code that you put in if you suspect that your plane is being hijacked. It takes literally just a split-second for you to put your hand down on the center console and flip it over. And not one of the four planes ever transponded a hijack code, which is most, most unusual. …
Commercial airplanes are very, very complex pieces of machines. And they’re designed for two pilots up there, not just two amateur pilots, but two qualified commercial pilots up there. And to think that you’re going to get an amateur up into the cockpit and fly, much less navigate, it to a designated target, the probability is so low, that it’s bordering on impossible.”
Col. George Nelson
In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft — and in most cases the precise cause of the accident,” wrote Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret), a former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. [17]
The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view,” continued Col. Nelson, a graduate of the U.S. Air Force War College and a 34-year Air Force veteran.
With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged. …
As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country’s history.”
Maj. John M. Newman, PhD
Maj. John M. Newman, PhD, U.S. Army (ret), is the former Executive Assistant to the Director of the National Security Agency. In testimony before a 2005 Congressional briefing, he said, It falls to me this morning to bring to your attention the story of Saeed Sheikh, whose full name is Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, and his astonishing rise to power in Al Qaeda, his crucial role in 9/11, which is completely, utterly, missing from the 9/11 Commission report…
The 9/11 Commission which studied US intelligence and law enforcement community performance in great detail, (maybe not so much great detail, but they did), neglected to cover the community’s performance during the weeks following the attacks to determine who was responsible for them, not a word about that in the Report.
The Report does discuss the immediate US responses but the immediate investigation is never addressed, and anyone who has closely studied the post-9/11 investigation knows that the first breakthrough came two weeks into the investigation when the money transfers from the United Arab Emirates to the hijackers were uncovered.
Furthermore, if you have studied that investigation, you know there is no disputing that while investigators may have struggled with the identity of the paymaster, they were clear about one thing, he was Al Qaeda’s finance chief. For this reason alone you have to ask why the 9/11 Commission Report never mentions the finance chief’s role as the 9/11 paymaster.” [18]
Capt. Omar Pradhan
Capt. Omar Pradhan, U.S. Air Force, is a former AWACS command pilot and Flight Instructor at the U.S. Air Force Academy. In a 2007 statement to this author, Capt. Pradhan wrote, As a proud American, as a distinguished USAF E-3 AWACS Aircraft Commander (with 350+ hours of combat time logged over Afghanistan and Iraq), and as a former U.S. Air Force Academy Flight Instructor, I warmly endorse the professional inquiry and pursuit of comprehensive truth sought by the Pilots for 911 Truth organization and the PatriotsQuestion911 website.”
Col. Ronald D. Ray
Another senior officer questioning the official account of 9/11 is Col. Ronald D. Ray, U.S. Marine Corps (ret), Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Ronald Reagan. A highly decorated Vietnam veteran (two Silver Stars, a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart), he was appointed by President George H. W. Bush to serve on the American Battle Monuments Commission (1990 — 1994), and the 1992 Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces. He was Military Historian and Deputy Director of Field Operations for the U.S. Marine Corps Historical Center, Washington, D.C. (1990 — 1994).
In an interview on Alex Jones’ radio show on June 30, 2006 [19], Col. Ray described the official account of 9/11 as the dog that doesn’t hunt”, meaning it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. In response to Alex Jones’ question, Is it safe to say or is the statement accurate that you smell something rotten in the state of Denmark when it comes to 9/11?” Col. Ray replied, I’m astounded that the conspiracy theory advanced by the administration could in fact be true and the evidence does not seem to suggest that that’s accurate. That’s true.”
After 4+ years of research since retirement in 2002, I am 100% convinced that the attacks of September 11, 2001 were planned, organized, and committed by treasonous perpetrators that have infiltrated the highest levels of our government. It is now time to take our country back,” wrote Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer, MS, U.S. Air Force (ret), in a statement to this author.
A retired fighter pilot, Col. Razer served as an instructor at the U.S. Air Force Fighter Weapons School and NATO’s Tactical Leadership Program and flew combat missions over Iraq. He continued, The ‘collapse’ of WTC Building 7 shows beyond any doubt that the demolitions were pre-planned. There is simply no way to demolish a 47-story building (on fire) over a coffee break. It is also impossible to report the building’s collapse before it happened, as BBC News did,[20] unless it was pre-planned. Further damning evidence is Larry Silverstein’s video taped confession in which he states ‘they made that decision to pull [WTC 7] and we watched the building collapse.’[21]
We cannot let the pursuit of justice fail. Those of us in the military took an oath to ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic’. Just because we have retired does not make that oath invalid, so it is not just our responsibility, it is our duty to expose the real perpetrators of 9/11 and bring them to justice, no matter how hard it is, how long it takes, or how much we have to suffer to do it,” he concluded.
Maj. Scott Ritter
Maj. Scott Ritter, U.S. Marine Corps, is a former Marine Corps Intelligence Officer who also served as Chief Weapons Inspector for the United Nations Special Commission in Iraq 1991 – 1998. In 2005, he said: I, like the others, are frustrated by the 9/11 Commission Report, by the lack of transparency on the part of the United States government, both in terms of the executive branch and the legislative branch when it comes to putting out on the table all facts known to the 9/11 case.” [22]
Maj. Douglas Rokke, PhD
Maj. Douglas Rokke, PhD, U.S. Army (ret), former Director of the U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Project and 30-year veteran, had this to say about the explosion at the Pentagon on 9/11, When you look at the whole thing, especially the crash site void of airplane parts, the size of the hole left in the building and the fact the projectile’s impact penetrated numerous concrete walls, it looks like the work of a missile. And when you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile.” [23]
The 9/11 Commission Report asserts that only three of the alleged hijackers were known to U.S. intelligence agencies prior to 9/11: Nawaf al-Hazmi, Salem al-Hazmi, and Khalid al-Mihdar. There is no mention in the Report that the names and photographs of alleged hijacker Marwan al-Shehhi and alleged ring-leader Mohamed Atta had been identified by the Department of Defense anti-terrorist program known as Able Danger more than a year prior to 9/11 and that they were known to be affiliates of al-Qaida. Able Danger also identified Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdar.
In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee in 2006 [24], Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, U.S. Army Reserve, former Chief of the Army’s Controlled HUMINT (Human Intelligence) Program, overseeing Army Intelligence and Security Command’s global controlled HUMINT efforts, stated: [B]asic law enforcement investigative techniques, with 21st Century data mining and analytical tools … resulted in the establishment of a new form of intelligence collection — and the identification of Mohammed Atta and several other of the 9-11 terrorists as having links to Al Qaeda leadership a full year in advance of the attacks. …
After contact by two separate members of the ABLE DANGER team, … the 9-11 [Commission] staff refused to perform any in-depth review or investigation of the issues that were identified to them. … It was their job to do a thorough investigation of these claims — to not simply dismiss them based on what many now believe was a ‘preconceived’ conclusion to the 9-11 story they wished to tell. … I consider this a failure of the 9-11 staff — a failure that the 9-11 Commissioners themselves were victimized by — and continue to have perpetrated on them by the staff as is evidenced by their recent, groundless conclusion that ABLE DANGER’s findings were ‘urban legend’.”
Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer
A 23-year military intelligence veteran, Col. Shaffer was recently awarded the Bronze Star for bravery in Afghanistan. In a 2005 interview on Fox News, Col Shaffer asked, Why did this operation, which was created in ’99 to target Al Qaeda globally, offensively, why was that turned off in the Spring of 2001, four months before we were attacked? I can’t answer that, either. I can tell you I was ordered out of the operation directly by a two-star general.” [25]
Supporting Col. Shaffer’s statement, Capt. Scott J. Phillpott, U.S. Navy, currently Commanding Officer of the guided-missile cruiser USS Leyte Gulf and former head of the Able Danger data mining program, stated in 2005: I will not discuss this outside of my chain of command. I have briefed the Department of the Army, the Special Operations Command and the office of (Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence) Dr. Cambone as well as the 9/11 Commission. My story has remained consistent. Atta was identified by Able Danger in January/February 2000.” [26] Capt. Phillpott is a U.S. Naval Academy graduate, who during his 23 years of Navy service has been awarded the Legion of Merit, Defense Meritorious Service Medal, three Meritorious Service Medals, the Joint Service Commendation Medal, two Navy Commendation Medals, and the Navy Achievement Medal.
Joel Skousen
Former U.S. Marine Corps fighter pilot Joel M. Skousen also questions the official account of 9/11. After his military service, Mr. Skousen served as Chairman of the Conservative National Committee in Washington DC and Executive Editor of Conservative Digest.
In the March 2005 issue, PM [Popular Mechanics] magazine singled out 16 issues or claims of the 9/11 skeptics that point to government collusion and systematically attempted to debunk each one. Of the 16, most missed the mark and almost half were straw men arguments – either ridiculous arguments that few conspiracists believed or restatements of the arguments that were highly distorted so as to make them look weaker than they really were. …
I am one of those who claim there are factual arguments pointing to conspiracy, and that truth is not served by taking cheap shots at those who see gaping flaws in the government story … There is significant evidence that the aircraft impacts did not cause the collapse [of the Twin Towers] …
The issues of the penetration hole [at the Pentagon] and the lack of large pieces of debris simply do not jive with the official story, but they are explainable if you include the parking lot video evidence that shows a huge white explosion at impact. This cannot happen with an aircraft laden only with fuel. It can only happen in the presence of high explosives.” [27]
Gen. Albert Stubblebine
Major General Albert Stubblebine, U.S. Army (ret), former Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command (INSCOM), is a strong critic of the official account of 9/11. In a 2006 video documentary he said, One of my experiences in the Army was being in charge of the Army’s Imagery Interpretation for Scientific and Technical Intelligence during the Cold War. I measured pieces of Soviet equipment from photographs. It was my job. I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, ‘The plane does not fit in that hole’. So what did hit the Pentagon? What hit it? Where is it? What’s going on?” [28]
During his 32-year Army career, Gen. Stubblebine also commanded the U.S. Army’s Electronic Research and Development Command and the U.S. Army’s Intelligence School and Center. Gen. Stubblebine is one of the inductees into the Military Intelligence Hall of Fame. [29]
Col. James R. Uhl, MD, U.S. Army (ret)
There is a well-organized cover-up of the events of 11 Sep 2001. The 9/11 Commission was a white-washed farce. There is evidence that US Government officials had advance knowledge of and are probably implicated in the events of 9/11,” wrote retired military physician, Col. James R. Uhl, MD, U.S. Army (ret), in a statement to this author.
A huge body of physical evidence has been ignored, suppressed, and ridiculed by the media and by our Government. Why did WTC 7 collapse? It was never hit by an airplane and was apparently brought down by explosives. How could Al-Qaida terrorists have had access and time to plant bombs in a top secret installation? Why did the 9/11 Commission fail to seek the reason for the WTC 7 collapse?” continued Col. Uhl, a 38-year Army veteran, who served in several theaters of operations, from Viet Nam through Iraq.
Capt. Russ Wittenberg
Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force, is a former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions and a retired commercial pilot, who flew for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years.
According to Capt. Wittenberg, The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S., plain and simple.”[30]
In the 2007 documentary video, 9/11 Ripple Effect,[31] he said I flew the two actual aircraft which were involved in 9/11; the Fight number 175 and Flight 93, the 757 that allegedly went down in Shanksville and Flight 175 is the aircraft that’s alleged to have hit the South Tower.
I don’t believe it’s possible for, like I said, for a terrorist, a so-called terrorist, to train on a [Cessna] 172, then jump in a cockpit of a 757-767 class cockpit, and vertical navigate the aircraft, lateral navigate the aircraft, and fly the airplane at speeds exceeding its design limit speed by well over 100 knots, make high-speed high-banked turns, exceeding — pulling probably 5, 6, 7 G’s. And the aircraft would literally fall out of the sky. I couldn’t do it and I’m absolutely positive they couldn’t do it.” [32]
Regarding Flight 77, which allegedly hit the Pentagon, Capt. Wittenberg said, “The airplane could not have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into what they call a high speed stall. The airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G maneuvers at those bank angles. … To expect this alleged airplane to run these maneuvers with a total amateur at the controls is simply ludicrous … It’s roughly a 100 ton airplane. And an airplane that weighs 100 tons all assembled is still going to have 100 tons of disassembled trash and parts after it hits a building. There was no wreckage from a 757 at the Pentagon. … The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77. We think, as you may have heard before, it was a cruise missile.”[33]
Col. Ann Wright
Another senior officer questioning the official account of 9/11 is Col. Ann Wright, U.S. Army (ret), who said in a 2007 interview with Richard Greene on the Air America Radio Network, It’s incredible some of these things that still are unanswered. The 9/11 Report — that was totally inadequate. I mean the questions that anybody has after reading that.” [34]
Col. Wright is one of three U.S. State Department officials to publicly resign in direct protest of the invasion of Iraq in March, 2003. She served for 13 years on active duty and 16 additional years on reserve duty in the U.S. Army. She joined the Foreign Service in 1987 and served for 16 years as a U.S. Diplomat. She served as Deputy Chief of Mission of U.S. Embassies in Sierra Leone, Micronesia and Afghanistan and she helped reopen the U.S. Embassy in Kabul in December, 2001.
She continued in her interview: How could our national intelligence and defense operations be so inept that they could not communicate; that they could not scramble jets; that they could not take defensive action? And I totally agree. I always thought the Pentagon had all sorts of air defense sort of equipment around it; that they could take out anything that was coming at it. And for a plane to be able to just fly low right over Washington and slam into that thing is just — I mean, you still just shake your head. How in the world could that happen?”
Capt. Gregory Zeigler
Capt. Gregory M. Zeigler, PhD, is a former U.S. Army Intelligence Officer. In a 2006 statement to this author, Capt. Zeigler wrote, I knew from September 18, 2001, that the official story about 9/11 was false. That was when I realized that the perpetrators had made a colossal blunder in collapsing the South Tower first, rather than the North Tower, which had been hit more directly and earlier.
Other anomalies poured in rapidly: the hijackers’ names appearing in none of the published flight passenger lists, BBC reports of stolen identities of the alleged hijackers or the alleged hijackers being found alive, the obvious demolitions of WTC 1 and 2 and WTC 7, the lack of identifiable Boeing 757 wreckage at the Pentagon, the impossibility of ordinary cell phone (as opposed to Airfone) calls being made consistently from passenger aircraft at cruising altitude, etc., etc., etc.”
Shortly after the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, a group of over 100 prominent Americans signed a petition [35] urging Congress to immediately reinvestigate 9/11. In addition to two former senior CIA officials [36] and several U.S. State Department veterans, [37] the signers included Lt. Col. Robert Bowman and Capt. Eric H. May, both mentioned above.
The petition stated, in part, We want truthful answers to questions such as:
1. Why were standard operating procedures for dealing with hijacked airliners not followed that day?
2. Why were the extensive missile batteries and air defenses reportedly deployed around the Pentagon not activated during the attack?
3. Why did the Secret Service allow Bush to complete his elementary school visit, apparently unconcerned about his safety or that of the schoolchildren?
4. Why hasn’t a single person been fired, penalized, or reprimanded for the gross incompetence we witnessed that day?
5. Why haven’t authorities in the U.S. and abroad published the results of multiple investigations into trading that strongly suggested foreknowledge of specific details of the 9/11 attacks, resulting in tens of millions of dollars of traceable gains?”
These questions and many others still remain unanswered three years after the petition was submitted and six years after the terrible events of 9/11. As the statements of these twenty-five former U.S. military officers demonstrate, the need for a new thorough, and independent investigation of 9/11 is not a matter of partisan politics, nor the demand of irresponsible, deranged, or disloyal Americans. It is instead a matter of the utmost importance for America’s security and the future of the entire world.
January 15th, 2008 at 8:34 am
The remarkable thing about humanity it is AFTER the damage is done
that the truth about the crooked goings on becomes accepted public knowledge.
Anyone with common sense and a little intuition ‘KNEW’ this whole 9-11
episode the Public Accound of both the event and the so called investigation was a crock.
BUT NOW THAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAS MADE IT THROUGH TWO TERMS with blind public support for all their UNAmerican activities with this one facilitated tragic, horrific destruction and all the lies surrounding and flowing from it WHAT?!
So NOW responsible people-in the know- apparently are beginning to speak up.
Big Deal !
(I suppose they felt it prudent to keep more quiet while the administration had such overwhelming support of a deceived and deluded public
and perhaps now sense the diminishing support for a weakening administration wiith all the damage it has done to America plain for all to see).
BUT it seems always that way. NO TRUTH ’til major damage is done.
It is in this that maybe Andy’s notion of a spiritual influence is actually at work.
The same has taken place in the Real Estate and Mortgage Market.
Now . . now .. . the F B I is investigating appraisal and mortgage fraud and criminal activity in the boom and partial bust in that market.
Of course that’s where the phony prosperity was being created that narcotized the public fascinated with all the unearned increment.
NOW . . AFTER it is essentially too late to make a major difference
here comes a little truth and the G-men and will harm as well as they can some of the little stupos caught up in the big scams while the Biggies have done their do and will escape clean away
if it all plays out as usual.
January 15th, 2008 at 9:06 am
Most Americans find the simple truth about 9?11 emotionally unacceptable because it conflicts sharply with the mainstream American ideology incorporated into the American worldview. Nevertheless a large and growing number of professonals, in the US and around the world–military, CIA, FBI, high government and ex-government officials, pilots, architects, engineers, demolition specialists, celebrities, academics, scholars, and scientists- are increasingly convinced that elements of the Bushite regime were complicit in orchestrating the 9/11 homocide, which kickstarted the fraudulent War on Terror.
The best three books I’ve read are:
9/11 and American Empire Intellectuals Speak Out edited by David Ray Friffin and Peter Dale Scott.
A series of pieces by academics detailing false flag operations by the US intelligence agencies and leading government officals in the history of the American power system.
The Road to 9/11 by Peter Dale Scott. a fanatically documented and checked by the U of California press outline by a Berkeley professor. He details how Cheney and Rumsfield pursued their right wing obsession since the days of Nixon,when they were both in his administration. They developed a secret government that could be installed if and when the president decides on his own to legally declare martial law, in legislation passed by the present Congress.
A series of books of which I have THE WAR ON TRUTH by Nafeez Ahmed, a brilliant analyst who is head of a British think tank. He puts 9/11 in historical perspective, documenting that the Islamic terror networks are double agents for Western and especially American power. They were orginated to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan and kept in play afterwards to promote Elite interests.
Ahmed states that the Western powers, especially American power, has been criminalized historically and extends far beyond the Bushite regime, which is its latest aberration. The previous attack on the towers appeared to be planned in the elder Bush regime, where Cheney was Sec of Defense, and occurred in the first few months of the Clinton administration. The terrorist who created the 1500 pound bomb placed in the tower in 1993 turned out to be an acknowledged FBI informant and operative.
The criminalization of Western power, including the trillion dollar narcotics industry, based in Afghanistan and Columbia, apparently has been supplemented by the sale of nuclear and other weapons on the black market, according to the evidence of Edmunds.
January 15th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
If they were to carry out such an atrocity, they would need arrogance, greed and a perceived superiority to the common man’s intellect, coupled with a belief that power creates reality. Check! We’ve seen they possess these anti-qualities and then some! And these are their tragic flaws, because as a wise man once said, “By their fruits you will know them”.
What is worrisome above all is that once the truth is revealed, their true character will need to assert itself. Luckily for now, you and I are insignificant serfs who hold no power in their estimation. Of course, according to GW, this is what is great about America – even the serfs can speak out without fear of being crushed under the fist of power. Apparently, these people have no regard for the power of truth – which is eternal if sought.
January 15th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
The nearly uniform failure of holders of and candidates for public office in the US to confront obvious official lying about the events of 9/11 is a clear declaration of impunity for the criminal elements that are in control of Western military power. Consequently we are confronted by the fact that many Western countries and the international financial networks are dominated by the most extensive totalitarian regime to surface at any time in history. We have indeed been born in interesting times.
January 15th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
This is rediculous, society cannot remain on a code three at all times, especially with an uneducated public and a security service that is living in the past. Salesmen were raping the daughters of the exploited over a century ago, while they handed them a cruxifix. These purveyors of superiority over the disposessed initiated a response that was long overdue. The pigeons came home to roost!
January 15th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Morley: ‘Most Americans find the simple truth about 9?11 emotionally unacceptable because it conflicts sharply with the mainstream American ideology.’
I believe that what has been going on with the Bush Administration, and the extent of the damage and torture done to people, and in complete secrecy, but also, in the most banal of visibility, and obviousness, is in fact emotionally unacceptable.
Either, you have not been a victim, or not ‘direct enough’ of one, and then what it takes is that you must somehow grasp the seriousness intellectually, like many of the people here on NSB have done.
I would be very interested in finding out sometimes, how this worked for you, and about the process of your finding out. And I am not sure, just what this involves emotionally. I don’t think, though, that most people are capable of grsping on an intellectual level. I am not, and I know that.
I am here, because I stepped, and lived in the very ugly middle of this nucleus, and at no time, ever, could I grasp what happened to me, and what was happening, at all, emotionally. I am still not able to grasp what I hear, even now, and again, and again, and every time again, emotionally.
How can I expect the Public to?
Yet, it is the public, and the professionals, and the ‘good Democrats’, and the so called helpers, who’s actions and inactions I will never be able to forget.
The really bad guys, they are a piece of cake.
January 15th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
To answer your question, Katrin, my emotional awakening came after the JFK assassination, in the early 1970′s. I happened to read Mark Lane’s book RUSH TO JUDGEMENT and I simply couldn’t believe it. He was picturred in the media as some sleaze who hung around poolrooms but he was a former legislator who was hired by Oswald’s mother to defend him. So he did in this book which he couldn’t get published in the US.
But Bertrand Russell formed a committee of notables in Europe who did not believe the Warren Comminssion and it was published there first, with a forward by the eminent historian Roper. He gives the documented specifics of what happened and these conflicted so sharply and extensively with the assertions of the Warren commission that it became obvious that the Warren commission was a fraud. What we would now call damage control.
But it simply never occurred to me that the whole power system could lie on that scale, including the mass media. So I read about the other murders, such as King, and found that this was a pattern of US power. For example JFK was murdered, then Senator Edward Kennedy was aalmost killed in a small plane crash, then Robert Kennedy was killed after he effective won the Dem nomination.
Robert was supposedly shot by Sirhan but the autopsy revealed he had been shot in the back of the head, so they fired the Coroner Nuguichi and concealed his report. There was also many more bullets and bullet holes found than the eight that Sirhan shot. I happened to be at a conference with one of the people shot there that night and he said that the shots appeared to come from BEHIND Robert, which agrees with later reports. Some of the Kennedy material is in a book by the JFK assassination by Peter Dale Scott.
So I was more emotionally prepared to believe that the US power system was murderous to its own people. Even so, 3000 people? It would kill three thousand civilian, white, professional Americans? That’s emotionally incredible.
I had the same concern that David does about the Elitist disregard for truth of the Bushite regime. What I think may happen is that power systems when they are losing power may become delusional, and develop what the historian William Appleman Williaams called ‘visions of omnipitence.’ Just as the Vatican did in the midlle of the 19th century when it was losing power to liberalism and the Pope centralized the Church by declaring himself Infaillble in faith and morals. The Bushite regime seemed to think that it was infaillible until their looniness was demonstrated unmistakably in Iraq.
Apparently a kind of ideological insanity occurrs, as I argue to Paul Craig Roberts a few years ago, and he now considers the Bushite regime delusional.
But consider, Katrin, the US power system got away with all these murders and conspiracies. Patsies were punished in the Kennedy and King murders and there was a slew of assassination of witnesses for which no one was punished. No one was punished in the Iran-Contra affair. No one in authority was punished when an FBI operative put a 1500 pound bomb in the basement of a tower in 1993. They all got away with it.
So, as is the case with power when you have enough, you want more. So an elaborate plan was devised as a public relations event to jumpstart the US invasion of Middle Asia, where the oil is. And I think the Bushites now want war as a destraction form the increasing public awareness of a large fraction of the American people, they they were involved in producing 9/11. And where it will all end, nobody knows. The US has nuclear weapons and in the next decade China will pass the US economically as the leading power.
January 15th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
That’s a lot to read and digest.
WRT the alleged, grand conspiracy, consider that our armed forces (army, navy, air force, marine corps, coast guard, etc.) constitute over a million man strength + how many retired personnel. And these retired military officers who have challenged the 9/11 commission report make up roughly 0.000025 of that number or much less if we include retired.
Some of their allegations don’t make sense. E.g. a missile hitting the pentagon, not a 757. Then where did the 757 vanish to? FAA tracked it from takeoff to the pentagon. And the retired pilots said that with all of their experience, they couldn’t repeat such a feat so how could these young terrorist kids? I think the hit was by chance. They came in low, belly landed & skidded into the building. I think the terrorist pilot had a different plan to come in higher. And consider Navy jet pilots who land on an aircraft carrier, a moving platform, yawing, rolling & pitching with perhaps a 20×40 foot window; they can do it. These retired air force pilots don’t have to make those kind of landings.
The assertion that the steel structure in the twin towers can’t melt. Steel is made from molten material at extreme temperatures. Aviation fuel is extremely volatile & burns at high temperatures. The steel structure of the towers was designed & constructed differently than any skyscrapers before; I believe I read that it was external to the inner habitable structure. So they were designed for a 707 to crash into them. Structures gain their strength from triangulation. And, if disrupted, lose their strength. The resultant weight of the collapsing floors plus the floors above undoubtedly exceeded the strength below. The designers were wrong.
The plane that crashed in Western PA & they question why no recognizable or sizable debris. You can’t compare this to a normal crash. Consider that it came down out of the skies nearly perpendicular at probably a speed in excess of 500 knots. Not surprising that there wasn’t much of significance left.
Then for them to suggest the grand conspiracy of hundreds or even thousands. Consider all of the FAA personnel involved, both flight controllers, investigators, clean up crews.
And police, FBI & other law enforcement. And the Department of Homeland Security shortly thereafter. Then the hundreds of reporters & commentators searching for clues. And finally the 9/11 commission. I have my doubts that a grand conspiracy could have maintained secrecy from all that exposure & publicity.
Bottom line, I would reserve my judgement call until I either reviewed the bios or had the opportunity to personally meet & interview each of these 25 individuals who have made these assertions, mostly to determine for myself if the author has quoted them correctly. And to see if they had any hidden agenda. I notice that most of them retired at 20 years at ranks below what I would normally expect for their total years of service. Most military officers who are promoted in due course of faster, remain on active duty beyond 20 years & up to 30 years. Unlike military officers on active duty, these 25 are all retired & are no longer restricted from what they can say or not say. Why hasn’t Congress convened a committee to reopen this issue? Why hasn’t the press picked up on it?
January 15th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Very good, Captain, I`m heartened to see that someone has some common sense, and living in a rational, very understandable way, with set of circumstances that preclude grand conspiracy events, keep the nation on an even keel. Failing that, we`ll all go bananas!
January 15th, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Thanks, Morley, for sharing all this. Of course, one thing that also helped me grasp this on an intellectual level, and I did anyway…(I just meant I could not have done so without having the personal experience first)…was my former ‘drilling and training’ growing up in Germany about the ugly truth of the Nazi’s. (us, and my country)
It was along with my own ‘Bush related experiences’, that I recognized, and remembered all I had learned in Germany about how something like this can happen, and that, yes, indeed, it can be this bad. (and even in America)
Of course, in 2002, I was blamed for my psychotic, and deranged, and psychopathic fantasies, and the fact that I was digging up sensationalism…
January 15th, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Such a loyal sailor Captain Who ? I’m surprised you didn’t make admiral.
(not really)
At the root of all suspicion is not only the unlikelyhood of all that has transpired and the way it has all happened.
And put in context with all the lying misrepresenting and Un American tactics.
They have so entirely and now openly violated average American sensibilities that it is impossible ot imagine they would not do all or allow to be done all that is believed and more.
People have been hanged on far less evidence.
You want to examine the bios of the 25 Officers
THAT’S THE STANDARD BIT; CAST ASPERSIONS ON THE MESSENGER !
That’s such a tired old tactic. I’m surprised that an Admiral xxx I mean, Captain wouldn’t go for something more solid but I guess you have seen it work before. I don’t think that has a dimes worth of merit.
Until there is a real investigation I think it is important to assume the worst
putting all into contexst with what is happening to America at home and abroad.
In general I would never convict anyone on circumstantial evidence alone
but I would never pronounce innocence, either, until it had been proved
absolute.
In this case the weight of circumstantial evidence is greater than and reason for doubt.
January 15th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
James, is it possoble you would help a dense soul decipher your earlier paragraph ?
What is this about pigeons coming hime to roost after the Salesmen handing out cruciifixes and raping the daughters of the exploited ?
Are you off your medicine again ?
January 15th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
A real investigation is needed; it hasn’t occurred. Taking swipes at those who question the 911 Commission Report is nothing but a diversion. The questioners don’t claim they know exactly what did happen. They are pretty sure, based on the evidence that they have been able to observe, that the 911 Commission version didn’t occur.
January 15th, 2008 at 9:42 pm
NIST admits to not testing for explosives residue–even with over 500 eyewitness accounts of explosions. NIST ignores the FEMA Appendix C finding of molten structural steel–in the basements of towers and WTC7. BBC broadcast the official reason for collapse of WTC7, and said the collapse had already occurred–23 minutes before WTC7 actually collapsed. The Shanksville ‘crater’ measured 15′ X 20′–hardly the size that would be expected of a passenger airliner crash. Rumsfeld said flight 93 was “shot down over Pennsylvania”. Bush said “the TV was obviously on” before he went into the elementary school and that he saw the plane crash into the building–he said this in two speeches. None of us saw the first plane crash on 9/11. That video was aired 9/12. FEMA set up a command post to rehearse a bioterrorism attack on Manhattan, on Per 29 THE DAY BEFORE 9/11. Marvin Bush served on the board of a WTC reinsurance company, Houston Casualty. Marvin Bush had served on the board of the electronic security company that was responsible for security of the WTC. The 9/11 Commission didn’t supoena any of the possibly 84 videos that could have shown what hit the Pentagon. Structural steel melts at 2800 degrees–over 1000 degrees hotter than jet fuel can burn and hotter than any known combustibles in the WTC can burn. Besides the large pools of molten iron were found in the basement levels of the vertically disintegrated buildings. WTC7′s collapse has yet to be explained by NIST–which rejects controlled demolition even though Building 7 fell just like a Las Vegas hotel demolition.
Hundreds of other circumstantial, testimonial, video, and forensic findings confirm the 9/11 Commission Report is a farce–a coverup.
E. Howard Hunt made a deathbed confession to having been the CIA team leader in Dealey Plaza for operation “The Big Event”. Shouldn’t that be cause to reopen investigations into JFK’s assassination? Hunt has been named as involved in many invetigative writings that dispute the truthfulness of the Warren Commission Report.
OK City federal building was an inside job involving, according to Terry Nichols affidavit, FBI Director Larry Potts. Look at US DISTRICT COURT affidavits of Nichols and David Hammar–and look on YouTube for OK City bombing local newscasts. It wasn’t just a truck bomb.
This modus operandi has been used by the monsters to institute control for centuries. The gullible are led to slaughter and enslavement. QUESTION AUTHORITY. Open your eyes.
January 15th, 2008 at 9:59 pm
Giuliani was hastily walking to a new command post with his entourage and cameras recorded Giuliani saying they had learned the first tower was going to collapse. He repeated this foreknowledge of collapse in an interview with Peter Jennings. Giuliani now denies he was forewarned of imminent collapse of the tower. Who knew to warn Giuliani? What of the countdown preceding the controlled demolition of WTC7–broadcast over emergency personnel walkie talkies? Prior to the premature announcement of WTC7′s demise, the British news anchor poses the question: “Will Americans have to reevaluate their freedom and balance it with security?” Watch YouTube (search BBC 23 Minutes)
Bush solved the crime on Sept. 12 with the announcement of names and showing of photos of the 19 “Islamic radicals”. Well over a year before Bush acquiesed to appointing the 9/11 Commission, on Nov. 10, 2001, Bush told the UN General Assembly: “We must speak the truth about terror. Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty. To inflame ethnic hatred is to advance the cause of terror.”
It was 411 days before the 9/11 Commission interviewed its first witness.
Cheney was informed of the incoming Flight 77 from 50 miles out by a young radar technician (see Norman Mineta testimony).
An Israeli paging service, ODIGO, is alleged to have broadcast a warning to its clients to evacuate from the WTC, two hours before the first plane hit.
On and on, the evidence exists that 9/11 was a false flags attack.
January 15th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
Welcome to the discussion, Cap’n, although you appear to be sailing with a lot of bilge on deck. No one suggests that all the FAA personell, flight controllers, clean up crew, cops, FBI, etc was part of a grand conspiracy. Except yourself. False flag operations are covert operations carried out on a need to know basis. Most people involved have no knowledge or guilt in the plot.
Although you raise an interesting point. High intelligence offficials in Germany, Russia and Eygpt maintain that this enormous operation of precise ferocity required state planning of many specialists over a long period of time. Would Cheney and Bush allow a large number of people to be knowlegeable of such a plot? There were other intelligence agencies involved, notably the Pakistani, Saudi Arabian, and Israeli. Would they outsource the planning? Seems unlikely. Another
unsloved problem.
I can understand your dismay at the lack of sufficient rank (less than yours) of the military critics. But out here on dry land, Cap’n, we tend to be more interested in what a man says than what rank he holds. I realize on a ship that rank is of fundamental importance, which is why the navy is much more authoritarian and hierarchal than the other services.
Then, too, the military pilots may not have the skills of navy pilots, but then no has suggested that the Terrorists did either.
As for reserving judgement until you interview all the critics, even though there may only be .00002416% of them in the population, it’s a biggish population in the world, and critics are all over it. What hidden agenda would they have, do you suppose. Communists? Terrorists? Not, God help us, Muslims! Well, ikeelhauling them a few times and sufficient time on bread and water would cure them of that.
Cap’n, it’s good to have your comments because anyone can raise interesting questions, but I respectfully suggest that you don’t know a rat’s ass about the work that the 9/11 truthers have done. On the other hand, there is nothing to stop you from learning it, and then you can combat this bad attitude against duly constituted authority in a more sophisticated and effective way.
January 16th, 2008 at 1:27 am
Ruppert’s, Griffin’s and other’s books are passed from one person to another. Add to that the power of the internet, and it seems very likely that it is just a matter of time (2-5 years?, possibly sooner in a democratic administration) before all this begins to unravel on the public stage.
Because heads of state and/or higher ups in other countries appear to have been in the know beforehand, I would think that we might have quite a spectacle on our hands.
January 16th, 2008 at 2:07 am
In general I see this whole sordid business as a current (and very trite) expression of an age-old mode of social organization, called Empire.
From Michael Ruppert’s book, Crossing the Rubicon:
p.15
“Although the apparent crisis is about terrorism, the real one is about energy scarcity. At the beginning of this book I document both the reality and the catastrophic implications of this epochal energy crisis.
“Because it’s so central to the emergent new order of things in the United States (which determines US action abroad), an incisive account of the energy issue also explains the real functioning of the world’s economy – and who controls it, and how this shapes so much of our daily lives.
“…. 9/11 seems like little more than a particularly horrible episode of mass murder (in a word, terrorism). But on this larger explanatory foundation, the evidence will inexorably prove our case: that the United States government not only had complete foreknowledge of the attacks of September 11, it also needed them and deliberately facilitated them, and even helped plan and execute them using techniques long understood in the world of covert operations.
“Once you understand the economic and financial forces governing the global economy, then the overwhelming evidence of the guilt of both the Bush and Clinton administrations, instead of being hard to believe, will suddenly appear to be unavoidable. That’s a large statement, and nobody should take it on trust.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
p.22
“According to most experts – including Cohn Campbell, one of the world’s foremost of experts with decades of experience in senior geologist, upper management, and executive positions with companies including BP, Amoco, FINA, and Texaco – there are only about one trillion barrels of accessible conventional oil remaining on the planet.
“Presently the world uses approximately 82 mb/d (million barrels per day). Even if demand remained unchanged, which it clearly will not, that would mean that the world will run out of conventional oil within thirty-five years.
“Oil, however, does not flow like water from a bottle. Since the world’s population and the demand for oil and natural gas are increasing rapidly, by reasonable estimates, the world supply of conventional oil is limited to perhaps 20 years.
“It’s a common mistake to assume that oil will flow in a steady stream and then suddenly stop one day. Instead, the stream will gradually diminish in volume, with occasional small increases, even as the number of people “drinkingâ€? from that stream, and the amount they consume explodes.
……………………………………………………………………………………….
p.42
“The plan [â€?Rebuilding America's Defensesâ€?, Project for a New American Century - 2000] shows Bush cabinet intended to take military control of the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in power ….”
January 16th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Hanu, these are great quotes but 9/11 is not about oil. It is about power. The oil scarcity is merely used by American power to try to hold back history. If the truth about 9/11 were to play out on the public stage, the historical problem would not be so threatening.
But this will never happen under the US power system. It CAN’T HAPPEN without decisively damaging the legitimacy of the US power system. Just as the Kennedy assasinations were never cleared up publicly despite two Comminssions investigating them.
These Commissions are, and must be, exercises in damage control. Western power is in the last stage of historical decay and the US power system is now institutionally lawless and criminalized. To demand that criminal power tell the simple truth is necessary in order to inform the population; to expect it to do so is naive.
Whicn is why the US power system is so dangerous, not only to the American people but to allthe people of the earth.
January 16th, 2008 at 11:33 am
This is a very dangerous time, and I think what Morley says is true when he says that 9/11 was about power. When you hear the president and other prominent and not so prominent figures talking publically about being in the early stages of WWIII, I think we need to pay attention to the big picture, opposed to the minutia concerning what temperature steel melts, the whereabouts of debris, and so forth.
It is inevitable that when one or more economic powers is slated to surpass the hegemon, there is war, and right now, China particularly, as well as India are about ten years (if not less) away from surpassing us. We have armed India with nukes. We have seized the oil fields in Iraq and have established our millitary bases. We are poised to eliminate the Russian and Chinese ally, Iran. Chavez has made his alliances against us. It would seem that the energy resources are being aligned for war. We have millitarily encircled Russia, and are proceeding with the missle shield. This and much more would lead me to believe they are serious when they say WWIII has begun. Was 9/11 an inside job? It really doesn’t matter if global war is on the horizon. It may well be paranoid to think this, and may well be simply maneuvers to protect our national interests, but they are saying it, not me.
January 16th, 2008 at 11:41 am
To my thinking, the idea of an American conspiracy behind 9/11 does indeed raise the question: how possible would it be to keep something involving that many people that secret for so long? I don’t see how that problem can be readily overcome in a plausible way.
For one thing, the number of people who could come forward is NOT limited only by those who would be actively IN on the plot. Consider what one of the military guys above says:
If the normal procedures were short-circuited by actual conspirators, it would seem, then the non-conspirators who did not get the messages/signals to act would also, presumably, have noticed the aberrant course of events. So those people would also be in a position to tell us that something is rotten in the state of Denmark. But instead of our having some of the pilots who should have intercepted the hijacked planes come forward, we have someone who “knows the drill” who tells us something must be amiss. Where are those pilots who never got the word, and the commanders who were the recipients of the “government” not doing “nothing”?
I’ve enough experience of how things work that it seems implausible that we’ve no active witnesses of the conspiracy in operation coming forward.
WHich is not to say I reject these notions –if I did, I would not have posted this piece here– but only that I have trouble understanding how a conspiracy of this magnitude would not be pretty widely LEAKED by now.
A smaller matter has to do with another of the Captain’s points: smaller, because it concerns only a small piece of the overall picture painted by these 25 military people. THat small piece is the idea that something other than the airliner hit the Pentagon. THe Captain asks: if that’s so, then where is the plane (not to mention all those people –including Ted Olson’s wife– who were on board the plane that, according to the official version, crashed and burned at the Pentagon.
January 16th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Once again, thanks for your common sense approach to the 9/11 terrorist attack, your recognition of the inevitable – someone`s conscience bothering them, forcing them to come forward – underlines the hope that exists for mankind. Paranoidal outbursts for the conspiracy (hearsay evidence), only delights the terrorists and bankrupts the country and exhausts it`s citizens. Keep it up, Andy.
January 16th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Thanks for your kind remarks, James.
But I also want to add that the continuing refusal of the “Establishment” to engage with skeptics on any of these issues –despite the fact that there are many, many people in the U.S. and elsewhere who believe that the truth is quite other than what we’ve been told– rings loud alarm bells in my mind.
And I believe it is the failure to have the truth established by reliable means –not any paranoia on the part of doubters– that is the major drain on the spirit and energy of the country.
January 16th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
To take your small point first, Andy, you, the Cap’n and my wife have or had the same objection; if a missile hit the Pentagon, where is the fourth plane?
These are two different questions. I haven’t followed the arguments closely and don’t have an assessment of what the reality was, but one can have reliable, indeed, overwhelming evidence, that a missile hit the Penagon, rather than a plane, without knowing a hoot in hell what happened to the fourth plane.
Did it land and the passangers killed, was it shot down, did it dive into the ocean or bays? Or was there some other explanation. Who knows. But a hundrred people could have theoretically saw a missile hit the penagon without knowing where the plane was, and their evidence could not be dismissed on that account.
As for having actual conspirators come forward, this has always been a very remote possiblity. It seldom happens. The people on covert operations are seasoned campaigners, carefully chosen, who usually die in silence, as ex secret agents usually do. And they know that if they go public with the secret truth, of which they were guility, they will have enemies on both sides and they almost certainly will be killed. Indeed, they would be killed if it is thought that might talk.
So covert operations can last decades or even centuries, or forever, unlighted by public revelation. The US-Itallian false flag operation, GLADIO, which killed hundreds of Italian civilian men, women and children, was covered up for decades. Operation NORTHWOODS, the terrorist attack devised by the Joint Chiefs of Staffs in the early 1960′s to get the US into a war with Cuba, was not revealed until four decades later.
And if a conspirator did reveal it, do you think that the mass media would publicize it. Hunt apparently confessed to leading the team against JFK on his deathbed, but almost no one knows about it. I didn’t, and I take an interest in these things. Did you know that Zola was murdered for his participation in the Dryfus affair? Did you know that Zachary Taynor was poisoned for his opposition to slavary, as detained in Parenti’s HISTORY AS MYSTERY.
Most people don’t know these things and, more important, don’t want to know them because they subvert the mainstream truth of a power system with which they identify.
January 16th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
It seems to me that unless and until there is a credible investigation into 9-11 by non-politically-connected parties, then the technical issues, of which the question of “how could such a massive effort be carried out without anyone coming forward to date” is certainly one, are beside the point. Everyone that I have read or talked to so far has one or more such question. The point is that the most important questions were not credibly addressed by the 9-11 commission, whose staff, BTW was headed by a close associate of and collaborator of Condoleezza Rice.
Until more people invest the time to dig into the 9-11 question, it will be possible for such people as Robert Gates to declare, “The American people know what they saw with their own eyes on September 11….” I think that is the very point — many Americans saw one thing but have been told something else from the moment of impact.
WRT the PA “crash” site, lots of debris from that plane were found across an 8-mile plume (impossible if the plane simply plowed into the ground as alleged). The residents of those surrounding counties know it; where has been any national coverage of this?
Every PR tool except scientific research has been used to avoid finding out and perhaps exposing what happened. History, the American people, and (at a minimum) the people of Iraq and Afghanistan deserve better.
January 16th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Andy,
It’s hard to imagine you have anything but a heurisitic understanding of the dynamics of secret and brutal conspiracies. Do you have the statistics on how people embroiled in corrupt power structures react? Your standard for doubt here is also way too low. You’re flummoxed trying to find a plausible scenario for maintaining secrecy.
You know, a physicist who tried to create the bomb without access to all the information tied up by the government in it’s making surely would have hit a barrier to which he couldn’t find a plausible solution. This government is in a much better position to understand information control than you are.
I would also suggest that some “who never got the word” have tried to get the message out, but were stymied like Sibel Edmunds, or worse. The cult of secrecy deserves more attention.
Furthermore, what is your objective in assessing credibility? Most of these people have a very pragmatic objective; they want a reinvestigation of 911.
January 16th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
“they want a reinvestigation of 911.”
I’d like that too, which is why I made an energetic attempt a while back to create the closest approximation to such an investigation that someone in my position could put together: a carefully conducted public debate between advocates of the two major points of view (the official report vs. the skeptics about that report).
At the same time, I’d like to add one point: I believe I know more about how information flows and leaks in official circles –including secret information– than you give me credit for.
January 16th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
One more thing in reading Morley’s comment. The person who comes forward as you are suggesting, Andy, not only endangers the economic standing of his family, but also their lives. And this message is very clear even if he/she does not have acquiantance with the services modus operandi. The event they are reporting on is threat enough.
They burden on them is much more than that on us little old speculators. Think of the cowardice of most Americans to respond to the Bushite threat before you assess the likelihood that at least one outside the know would get publicity.
January 16th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
Also, the people who know, and who saw, aside from what Duane already mentioned, are not always the ones who have, or rather still have at that point, the credibility of captain 30 years.
This stuff is traumatic, and yes, there is fear, often PTSD, and very, very likely, these people have tried, and been ‘beaten’ (in whatever way) over and over again, and have already suffered occupational and social loss and status. They have been threatened, and their friends and colleagues have turned their backs towards them, and/or become hostile and angry. If they were not alone before, they sure have been ever since they tried to do ‘the right thing.’
And, this is only the most minimal, and standard treatment.
There is no help for them, and no help for them to give, except guaranteed failure and loss. (If they bare lucky, they are still alive, but broken)
We have to stop listening only to those who have ‘credibility’. it’s a really stupid and superficial, and unrealistic thing to ask for.
Do you expect the broken army guys, and those who have been water-boarded, to speak like a lawyer?
January 16th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
I agree, Katrin, that we ought not listen “only to those who have ‘credibility’.” Often, the people in a position to tell us what we need to know are not people with such “credibility.”
At the same time, credibility also matters. Particularly on some kinds of questions.
On “what did you see?” most all we need of a witness is honesty.
On a question like, “could a fire from a fuel-filled airliner bring down a building constructed like the World Trade Center,” the opinion of the average guy on the street is not worth as much as that of a structural engineer.
January 16th, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Questions I have always wanted to ask ?
What are the four airliners?
For which Airline was each flying ?
Who were the Pilots and who the crew members on each ?
Where is the passenger list for each flight ?
Are all the above declared deceased ? And what are the settlements made with each surviving family ?
Were the airliners each insured and by what Insurance Entity ?
Did they pay off to the Airlines or if not, how was a settlement made and by what entity . . for how much ?
We have been given the names of the onboard conspirators ?
If these were people were on the passenger list as all others . . how do they know that THESE were the hijackers ?
Who were the lease Tenants in the destroyed buildings ?
Who were the employees of these firms ?
How many and exactly who is supposed to be deceased and with claims made by surviving families ?
Who is normally in the buildings at the hour of the disaster and were NOT?
And Why ?
When the airliner struck the building on one side with the fire and heat necessarily in one area more than another(assuming the heat was sufficient to melt the steel structure as claimed) WHY DID THE UPPER STORIES NOT TIP OVER RATHER THAN COLLAPSE TOGETHER ?
As for the missile or plane at the Pentagon, I want these answers first and then more practical details will fall in line.
As for saying YEARS and Many,Many people necessarily involved making such a plan I would need an explanation why people would believe this, but then I do not watch T V.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
I have a Colored friend in Federal Prison on Drug Conspiracy conviction.
They moved him around in at least three local county jails before his trial for maybe a year waiting for him to TALK and identify the dealers and sources he wa involved with promising him a light sentence at most. He was facing 20 years and had a wife and new baby boy.
But he told me, I can’t; I’d have to spend the rest of my life looking behind my back. He has served over ten years and still there. Why ?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
January 16th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
The Anerican power system is too corrupt at this point in history to appoint an honest commission to investigate 9/11. The power instittutions are mostly obedient servants of the ruling class, 1% of the population, who own half of the assets of the United States, as use them to gain control of the rest. Any commission appointed by their servant legislators will be a exercise in damage control.
However Gore Vidal, a political person as well as a novelist, had an interesting idea which he gave in an address to the National Press Association in 1992. He suggested a Constitutional Convention be held, as mandaded under Article 5 of the US Constitution, to revise the obsolete aspects of the electoral system, such as the Electoral College. Such an assembly could also be used to appoint an honest commission to investigate 9/11.
To conveign such a Convention requires two thirds of the states requesting one. It turns out that right wing loonies actually wanted one some years back and nearly two thirds of the state assemblies have already requested it.
Unfortunately the state assemblies tend to be even more corrupt than Congress, so they will perform like faithful servants when the ruling class tells them to roll over. But the threat of calling a Constitutional Convention might make the ruling class take notice if its credible, and this might be a good way of mobilizing the population and legitimating institutiional change.
January 16th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
“Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not after you.â€?
I think anyone with a shred of common sense would have the same the same reservations and doubts as Andy has expressed, in regards to the “keeping-it-all-a-secret issue.�
As Ruppert observes: “One of the most trumpeted themes in the pot 9-11 world has been a blanket assertion that such a large conspiracy (if conducted within the U.S. government) could be concealed from the American people or the people of the world before the crime was committed.�
His counter argument goes pretty much as follows. Consider the Manhattan Project or the development of the Stealth fighter. In both cases the government was able to maintain a net of secrecy involving thousands of people. The success in maintaining secrecy about the atom bomb (or in any classified operation) lies in compartmentalization. For instance, a technician dealing with the uranium refining process in Nevada would have no knowledge of its intended purpose. Nor would he be held in any way responsible for operations in which this product was used.
Ruppert points out that in order to execute the kind and size of covert operation necessary to pull-off a 9-11 type scenario, it is not at all necessary for thousands of people to see the whole picture. He goes on to say that the government protects itself from disclosure by requiring millions of employees to sign security agreements and loyalty oaths. Were any of these individuals to talk, even about criminal behavior, they would be subject to immediate incarceration and/or loss of benefits.
“Perpetrating the murders of 9-11 required only a few people inside a small circle with a ‘need to know’ about the entire plan or portions of it.â€?
For reasons of 1) their own safety, 2) the desire to avoid legal culpability, and “job security� (to name only a few) participants would, therefore, be highly motivated not to inform on one another.
Ruppert adds:
“My investigation will…demonstrate how easy it is in practice to conceal a broad conspiratorial agenda when the suspects control the information flow and operational procedures within the government. After two and a half years of investigation my estimate is that the number of people with complete foreknowledge of the attacks of September 11th would likely not exceed two dozen, all of them bound to silence by Draconian secrecy oaths.�
This makes sense to me.
January 16th, 2008 at 10:32 pm
Morley,
“Hanu, these are great quotes but 9/11 is not about oil. It is about power.”
I essentially agree with you. In terms of my current understanding, I guess the way I might put it is that is about both. After all, The Empire must have its oil to function, not to mention profits.
The whole business seems to be unraveling…. and, in a way that the powers-that-be will find increasingly difficult to control.
January 16th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
I would like to do my share of speculating here by observing that if there was a conspiracy so far advanced and energetic as this one appears to be then those conspirators would most likely not slink away as the truth comes out. If they were capable of holding certain principles that allowed them to enact such destruction how could anyone believe that even worse will not happen? Or at least the disruption of the political process now beginning? If the conspiracy is true, then it looks to me that it’s probably a matter of months within which someone needs to actively stop the people involved. Or we just hang on for a very rough ride.
January 16th, 2008 at 11:06 pm
Hanu says, or rather suggests a point that is extremely important, and relevant. The way this works is that indeed, only a handful of people know ‘everything’.
Most other people that are involved, and I mean involved as in ‘guilty’, only know parts, and everyone knows different parts. Some know more than others. Some know, but don’t know what they are doing is part of a conspiracy, or even wrong, or that they are participating in a crime. Some find out when it’s too late to back out.
The planning is done extremely intelligently, and as I have mentioned before, and as a result of having become familiar with many of the unusual dynamics involved, there is often this combination of 1) total secrecy, and 2) complete openness, and visibility, and what I call ‘banality’, (i.e.. as it relates to the evidence.)
When something so terrible takes place in full daylight, and in public, and right next door, and is so visible…it’s awfully hard to notice.
Why? Because you just don’t believe it…that’s why. Same with the evidence. People just don’t believe something so blatant; so shamelessly obvious, and unconcealed.
January 17th, 2008 at 12:04 am
Andy,
I apologize for my accusative tone. I meant that one who is not inside those conspiracies, and even one who is, would be very unlikely to understand the failure modes of the cover-up and even less have any idea of the likelihoods involved. Someone outside successfully concealed conspiracies has little information on them and cannot reliably estimate the likelihood of exposure. So I would bet any assessment that someone should have popped out by now is at best a hunch. Even if that hunch is based on historical information, the applicability of that information to any new conspiracy would be dubious.
January 17th, 2008 at 1:20 am
From Rubicon:
p148
“September 13-19, 2001: Members of bin Laden’s family and important Saudis are flown out of the US. The New York Times explains, “The young members of the bin Laden clan were driven or flown under FBI supervision to a secret assembly point in Texas and then to Washington from where they left the country on a private charter plane when airports reopened three days after the attacks.”
“If you read carefully, note they are flown to Texas and Washington before the national air ban is lifted – the fact of flights during this ban is now unfortunately widely called an urban legend. [New York Times, 9/30/011 There have been conflicting reports as to whether the FBI interviewed them before they left the country. Osama bin Laden's half brother Abdullah bin Laden stated that even a month later his only contact with the FBI was a brief phone call. [Boston Globe, 9/21/01; New Yorker, 11/5/01]
“It turns out that the flights did occur, and according to former National Security aide Richard Clarke, in his testimony before the Kean Commission, the orders possibly came from “The White House.”
“Paul Thompson’s timeline adds more details of the special flights:
“September 13, 2001: Confirmation that bin Ladens and Saudis did fly during the no-fly ban and left the country before they could be properly questioned comes from a Tampa Tribune article.
“A Lear jet takes off from Tampa, Florida, while a ban on all non-military flights in the US is still in effect. It carries a Saudi Arabian prince, the son of the Saudi defense minister, as well as the son of a Saudi army commander, and flies to Lexington, Kentucky, where the Saudis own racehorses. They then fly a private 747 out of the country. Multiple 747s with Arabic lettering on their sides are already there, suggesting another secret assembly point. Intriguingly, the Tampa flight left from private Raytheon hangar. [Tampa Tribune, 10/5/01]“
January 17th, 2008 at 1:46 am
Is there any information, or thought, about whether G.W. Bush’s father may be involved, or has any knowledge about any of this? The reason I am asking is, that I have some reason to believe, that the original minds behind this ‘new world order’ are men now in their 80′s. (plus/minus)
I do not know this, but I am very interested in finding out more.
January 17th, 2008 at 7:49 am
GOOD QUOTES, HANU. Unfortunately I’ve never read Rupport who is quoted by academics and had a very interesting life. I wish I could borrow the book from you.
But Garitt is right. The people who led this conspiracy are still powerful and they will protect themselves by any means necessary. And they obviously will not stop at mass murder.
January 17th, 2008 at 11:56 pm
Sure is, Katrin. See Chap. 9 of CTR.
January 18th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Andy,
In response to your raising reasonable questions about the government’s ability to keep a major covert operation secret, I am posting a link to some very interesting material.
It is posted in full on-line at:http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/USO/
David Ratcliffe’s book, Understanding Special Operations
“This book explores some of the details of how the United States got into the business of conducting Special Operations after World War II. The term “special operations” means “military services providing support to the clandestine activities of the United States Government.” The term is a euphemism[1] for overthrowing governments, sabotage, murder, contrived wars, espionage, torture and assassination. ”
Ratcliffe draws extensively on the work of USAF Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, the author of the very highly esteemed book on the CIA, The Secret Team.
In particular I would invite you I would direct your attention to have a look at
Chapter 3. A Very Special Operation: The Assassination of President Kennedy, Part I: Cancelling Secret Service, Military, and Police Units
in Dallas and Inserting False Actors in Their Place.
Ratcliffe/Prouty offer a now common idea: that there is a power-elite directing a great many world events and to whom heads of state, presidents, etc. must in one form or another answer.
It has bee more than 45 years since Kennedy’s assassination and countless independent reseachers have exposed all sorts of inconsistencies in the “official story” and Warren Commission Report. Clearly, there has never been an official review of this material and a fresh investigation opened.
I would say this is proof enough, conceptually, of the notion that highly coordinated, major covert operations can remain closed to legal and/or public scrutiny.
January 19th, 2008 at 12:45 am
Hanu, what is CTR? I am sorry if I should know, but I don’t. I would like top take a look at this source you recommended.
January 19th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Crossing the Rubicon – IMHO a pretty amazing book.
February 20th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Hanu, I just finished reading Ruppert’s book Crossing the Rubicon, your having so extensively referenced it over the past several weeks. Thank you.
It was a most engrossing book. I had to set aside its quirkiness, including the author’s endless self-references. On the other hand, he did the work and was apparently one of the very first persons to identify many of the things that others have later come to accept.
I’ve also read many commentaries/book reviews on both the book and Mr. Ruppert himself. Apparently he fell out with the 911Truth group, left the country (then returned), and has since completely ceased any public activities. His website was suspended. There was more than a few hints that his life was in danger. Critics say that Ruppert used mostly secondary sources (although in some ways that made the book more riveting to me because so much of what most Americans don’t know or won’t believe have been reported in newspapers & magazines across the nation). Yet he does cite many primary sources as well. Then there is the usual ad hominem attacks on Mr. Ruppert, to be expected given the courage he showed in his years-long exposition.
For me, Crossing the Rubicon was the first place that I learned about quite a few facts and allegations, especially the details of the war games held at that time, and a new look at the timeline. Ruppert used a clever organizational principle, that of an investigator looking into a capital crime (motive, means, opportunity, etc.). Despite its length (almost 600 pgs.), I couldn’t put it down. Its last few pages are the first time that Ruppert actually tells his readers how he thinks the whole thing went down (I didn’t peek), although as he builds his case one gets the idea.
February 2nd, 2010 at 10:21 am
As for the issue of secrecy, thousands of people knew about the first two atomic bombs, and that never leaked out. Our enemies knew we were working on the bomb, but did not know we actually had one. We dropped two so they could know we might have more, many more..We had exactly two. (dropped them both)