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.
New York City activist 
Many of the these warnings and subsequent lies are so well documented that it demonstrates how powerless/sloth we really are against/within this system. So much time has and will continue to elapse- and the truth will never come out of the right mouths. If anything, it will be a deduction made by the global community. I mean look at what’s going on in Iraq now- even more heinous, based on more deception and all Americans are just supposed to go back to sleep while the death toll climbs over a million and 1000 vets attempt to ‘off’ themselves per month. As far as I’m concerned foreknowledge has been adaquately demonstrated. Paul Thompson and others have already done this work.
It would be a lot more ‘shocking’ to prove CD or as the pilots are doing- impossible flight paths with respect to their reported trajectories- things like this would cause more of a reaction imo- to those oceans of people that are still asleep. The average person probably would equate foreknowledge with ‘just complicated politics.’
Furthermore I don’t believe an investigation will ever happen from within the states. I mean even with supeona power, these guys won’t show up.
If anything, as a new psy op, elements within the UN could eventually create cause for a ‘new investigation’ and then due to the ‘shocking findings’ of such an investigation- attempt to implement some sort of sweeping changes which would further consolidate control over the corrupt and dangerous rogue US government.
More likely though is a new terror event, which would among many things, totally obliterate any remnants of 911 curiosity/political dissidents- a new event, coupled with the dollar’s full implosion would be grounds for the executive directives to kick in.
Comment by realitydesign — April 22, 2008 @ 6:00 am |
Why should having questions about some of the various 911 scenarios put forward most often by Truthers obligate one to “go back to sleep while the death toll climbs over a million and 1000 vets attempt to ‘off’ themselves per month” in regards to Iraq? If anything, this illustrates another of the biggest misconceptions among 911-Truthers: the false implication that the primary reason for the continuance of the Iraq war is a “failure to expose 911.”
I can confidently reassure you that the people who still register for service in the US Armed Forces are not primarily motivated by any beilef that Osama pulled off 911 and needs to be stopped. The cavalier way in which the Bush administration manufactured fake charges alleging that Saddam was behind 911, and the easy way that the Democrats rolled along with such tripe, has made it clear to most that registering for the Armed Services has little to do with “preventing another 911.”
People go into the armed forced because:
a) They don’t see any other career options open to them in a sinking economy.
b) They don’t see any political alternatives taking shape which would offer an alternative.
The war in Iraq is continuing today only because such demoralization has kept people from rocking the boat, even when they can see that the boat is slowly filling up and sinking. Whatever the exact truth about 911, it is not going to alter that pattern. Changing things at that level requires serious action outside of the narrow framework of a 911 investigation.
Comment by patricksmcnally — April 22, 2008 @ 12:28 pm |
realitydesign wrote:
Certainly they’ve done a lot of work. However, quite a few of the news stories they cite have been challenged by “debunkers” on various grounds. That’s why I think it would be a good idea for me, at some point, to go through all these stories and try to pick out the strongest ones.
I’ll have more to say in a subsequent post.
Comment by Diane — April 22, 2008 @ 1:25 pm |
(This comment is an edited pingback.)
The post linked below contains my further reply to realitydesign’s comment above.
– Diane
Pingback by 9/11 Truth movement goals and strategy? « New York City activist — April 22, 2008 @ 1:49 pm |
Patrick in no way did i mean to link 911 and Iraq- I’m not sure how you took that. I just meant that Iraq was a much bigger deception in terms of net death and destruction and it’s still ongoing despite its exposure as a fraud.
Comment by realitydesign — April 22, 2008 @ 1:54 pm |
> in no way did i mean to link 911 and Iraq
OK, that clarifies some things.
> I just meant that Iraq was a much bigger deception in terms of net death and destruction and it’s still ongoing despite its exposure as a fraud.
Yes, it goes on because people have no clear idea of what to do for a political alternative. But the main lies about Iraq have been exposed, as you say.
That only casts more doubt on the comparison with 911. If it is really true that 911 was as much of a fraud as the “WMDS ready to go off on 45 minutes notice” story, then the events around Iraq would lead us to expect that more might be exposed at this point. Even if that expectation is premature, the comparison doesn’t help here.
Comment by patricksmcnally — April 22, 2008 @ 6:33 pm |
(This comment is an edited pingback.)
Pingback by 9/11 - The Saudi connection? « New York City activist — May 5, 2008 @ 4:09 am |
“If it is really true that 911 was as much of a fraud as the “WMDS ready to go off on 45 minutes notice” story, then the events around Iraq would lead us to expect that more might be exposed at this point.”
In what way?
“more might be exposed at this point.”
I think a lot has been exposed…there are thousands of scholars and professionals from all related fields and intel/military/politics worldwide that understand 911 was an inside job and they are making there work public- more join the ranks daily. That is indeed a good deal of exposure- plus in the polls that were done, most people in the general public understand there was at least some level of serious deception around the events of 911 with a LARGE percentage feeling that it was a full on inside job…so on a grassroots level at least, word is out.
It’s my feeling that in the near future people will totally detach from these fake (democratic…lol) political systems and mainstream media reaches due to a broad understanding that those structures ARE not valid in the sense that they are corrupt/hi-jacked by criminal syndicates and no longer serve humanity (if they ever did). Alternative cultures will emerge…the gig is up for them, their system of deceit, manipulation and control is in collapse now.
Humanity is on the brink of a major evolutionary rift and we are about to launch out over it…
Comment by realitydesign — May 5, 2008 @ 1:33 pm |
> there are thousands of scholars and professionals from all related fields and intel/military/politics worldwide that understand 911 was an inside job
That isn’t quite accurate. What we have is a surplus of religion professors ready to attach their name to the 911-TM. But not many experts in structural engineering ready to do the same.
Comment by patricksmcnally — May 6, 2008 @ 12:40 am |
“That isn’t quite accurate. What we have is a surplus of religion professors ready to attach their name to the 911-TM. But not many experts in structural engineering ready to do the same.”
It is in fact accurate. And the more people that are presented with the info, the more that usually admit the offical story is scam-laden. Signing on with the TM ‘officially’ rules out alot of people as well because you know in America we have this ridicule/nuerosis thing built into our culture- and so lots of people are scared into apathy.
Many people just aren’t aware of the details.
Comment by realitydesign — May 6, 2008 @ 5:22 am |
The airliners were 1/3rd of 1/10th of 1% the mass of the towers.
Do we ever hear how many tons of steel were in the impact zones?
Suppose it was physically impossible for the airliners to cause those buildings to collapse in that little time? If we knew the amount of steel shouldn’t we have an idea how long it would take to heat.
So if it was IMPOSSIBLE for the planes to do it then what does it matter who flew the planes? What does that do to the Let It Happen theory?
So why doesn’t the Movement demand accurate data on the buildings and apply some high school physics? The data in Urich’s spreadsheet is wrong. It comes from the NIST’s SAP2000 data. SAP2000 is the program that did NIST’s simulation.
You know how computers are:
GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT
Comment by psikeyhackr — May 6, 2008 @ 1:17 pm |
“So if it was IMPOSSIBLE for the planes to do it then what does it matter who flew the planes? What does that do to the Let It Happen theory?”
True True, they have us deep in these rabbit holes wastin’ time…
Comment by realitydesign — May 6, 2008 @ 1:20 pm |
psikeyhackr wrote:
How do you know it’s wrong? Do you have a source of more accurate data? If so, please point us to it. Or are you just dismissing the source? If so, on what basis?
Are you alleging that it’s physically impossible? (If so, won what basis?) Or are you just hypothesizing that it’s physically impossible in order to make the point below?
The question of whether there were real live human hijackers is very important to some people, such as Kevin Barrett, who regard the idea that there were indeed hijackers as a “blood libel” against Muslims.
Comment by Diane — May 6, 2008 @ 9:57 pm |