As I’ve said in the past two posts, what I personally find suspicious about 9/11 is not the story of the hijackers, but rather the claim that the attack could not have been prevented.
It seems to me that the FBI and the CIA had no good excuse not to have known about the plot in advance, in detail, given that the plot had been hatched way back in 1995 or so, and given that the FBI and the CIA had indeed been spying on al-Qaeda for lo these many years, except that the FBI sometimes refused, for no good reason, to follow up on obvious leads.
According to Patty Casazza, one of the Jersey Girls, many whistleblowers from the FBI and various intelligence agencies approached the Jersey Girls asking them to ask the 9/11 Commission to call them to testify. Most of them were never called.
Patty Casazza says that some of these whistleblowers alleged that they had been aware of very specific warnings about the attacks, including both the exact date and the method of the attack. (See this transcript of statements by 9/11 family member activists Bob McIlvaine and Patty Casazza on 11/3/2007, as part of a panel specifically about the 9/11 Commission at the “9/11: Families, First Responders, & Experts Speak Out Symposium” in West Hartford Connecticut. A brief history of the Jersey Girls and their struggle can be found in the article 9/11 Widows Keep on Asking the Tough Questions by Joseph Murtagh, Muckraker Report, February 12, 2007. Another copy of the latter article, plus some interesting P.S.’s, can be found here on 911truth.org.)
Of course, since most of these whistleblowers have not gone public themselves, we have no way of evaluating their credibility. In the meantime, it’s worth paying attention to another whistleblower, Sibel Edmonds, who has not claimed to have encountered FBI foreknowledge quite as specific as the exact date of the attack, but who has made other very disturbing allegations about treason in the State Department. (See the many news stories about Sibel Edmonds that are summed up and referenced on the Cooperative Research site. Among many other news stories, see this Village Voice story, April 19th, 2005. See also The 9/11 Commission: A Play on Nothing in Three Acts and FBI & 9/11 on the website of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, and see also 9/11 whistleblowers ignored, retaliated against by Michael Hampton.)
For plenty of other indications that the U.S. government should have known quite a bit in advance about the plot, see Key Warnings on the Cooperative Research site. See also the Cooperative Research sites collection of news stories on Saudi Arabia.
The news stories vary in quality and in how well corroborated they are, etc. At some point I should go through the above pages and try to pick out the best-established stories.
Alas, when dealing with a topic as inherently murky as the secret knowledge of intelligence agencies, it can be difficult to find truly trustworthy smoking guns. This is one of the reasons why we need a real investigation with subpoena power – and which actually uses that power to call a variety of witnesses, unlike the soft approach of the 9/11 Commission.
However, when calling for a new investigation, we need to do the best we can to find “probable cause,” in the meantime.