Sixteen More Reasons to Question 9/11

It has been 16 years since the crimes of September 11th, 2001. In that time, facts have been revealed that led more than a third of Americans to believe that the U.S government was involved in the attacks. This blog noted 14 such incredible facts on the 14th anniversary of the crimes. Here are 16 more.

  1. In the nine years before 9/11, the FBI failed miserably at preventing terrorism. There are many examples of how FBI leadership under director Louis Freeh facilitated and covered-up acts of terrorism during this time. After 9/11, the FBI took extraordinary measures to hide evidence related to the attacks.
  2. CIA director George Tenet led an agency that also failed in its duties related to counterterrorism and those failures appear to have been intentional. Like Freeh, Tenet had developed secret paths of communication with Saudi authorities. The facts suggest that Tenet facilitated the crimes of 9/11.
  3. The FBI and CIA have made a mockery of the U.S. justice system as it relates to 9/11. While these agencies are suspected of involvement, they have charged others with the crimes using secret evidence in a secret military trial. The accused have been held in seclusion for nearly 15 years while FBI and CIA agents attempt to insert themselves as defense team members, ensuring total control of the narrative.
  4. CIA officers responsible for identifying deception in others fail to notice that the characteristics of deception are amply demonstrated when government representatives respond to questions about 9/11.
  5. There have been four, distinctly different, official accounts given for how the North American air defense system failed to intercept any of the hijacked planes. The last account says that dozens of military officers spent years lying to Congress, the 9/11 Commission, and everyone else, in ways that made the military look bad. Few observers considered the simpler explanation—that the 9/11 Commission lied to divert attention from many difficult questions.
  6. Parts of the official account of 9/11 are based on the highly improbable flight path of a military cargo plane called Gofer 06. The crew of this plane witnessed the crashes of two of the four planes that day despite those crashes occurring 127 miles and less than 30 minutes apart.
  7. There are dozens of unanswered questions about the events at the Pentagon and the plane that reportedly crashed there.
  8. The 19 young men accused within 72-hours of the attacks were known to enjoy strip bars, alcohol, drugs, and other things that are clearly non-Muslim activities. Moreover, these suspects were not capable of accomplishing most of what was needed to pull off the crimes.
  9. Mohamed Atta, the man called the “9/11 ringleader,” had a lot in common with Lee Harvey Oswald—the man accused of killing President Kennedy. Both Atta and Oswald were suspected of using illicit drugs, seemed to be protected by authorities, and were associated with CIA-linked entities.
  10. The New York Times led the propaganda behind the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 and it also led the propaganda behind the cover-up of the 9/11 crimes. It did so by ignoring many of the most relevant facts, by promoting false official accounts, and by belittling those who questioned the 9/11 events.
  11. On the day of the attacks, firefighters, journalists, survivors, and eyewitnesses testified to secondary explosions in the World Trade Center buildings. Videos of these testimonies were held secret for years by the government agency NIST and released only via FOIA request after public interest died down. Scientists have explained that the towers came down due to explosions and that the NIST investigation was fraudulent.
  12. Among the evidence ignored by the mainstream media are many facts indicating the presence of thermite at the World Trade Center. Thermite is a chemical mixture that can be used to melt and cut structural steel. Instead of addressing this evidence, supporters of the official account have engaged in deception and distraction in order to obfuscate the facts.
  13. Despite recent, worldwide protests against the abuse of science, the most glaring example of politically motivated pseudoscience continues to be ignored by many scientists. That is the 7-year sequence of contradictory explanations provided by U.S. government investigators for the destruction of the WTC buildings.
  14. Links between 9/11 and the 1995 bombing in Oklahoma City lead to questions about the company that controlled security for many of the facilities impacted on 9/11, including the WTC complex. For instance, that WTC security company shared the same OKC airport office later occupied by the flight trainer for Zacarias Moussaoui, the alleged “20th” hijacker.
  15. Media and certain government representatives have hinted at Saudi Arabian ties to the 9/11 crimes. However, those hints always omit the most interesting links between the 9/11 attacks and Saudi Arabia—links that implicate powerful people in the United States.
  16. When the long-awaited 28 pages missing from the Congressional Joint Inquiry Report into 9/11 were finally released, those pages reinforced concerns that deep state players were involved in the attacks. Such players include Wirt D. Walker, the CEO of the WTC security company, who is clearly associated with top-secret operations.

As the crimes of 9/11 continue to go unsolved and largely unquestioned, Americans should be aware that another 9/11 could happen at any time. If it does, the ongoing failure to question obvious deception in terrorism could take society to places where freedom to question is no longer an option.

 

Advertisements
Posted in 9/11, 9/11 Suspects, Terrorism | 2 Comments

NORAD’s Coincidental Exercises on 9/11

In 2004, U.S. Air Force General Richard Myers responded to a pointed question on the subject of military exercises, or war games, practiced prior to September 11th 2001. Myers reported that the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) had practiced “five exercise hijack events” between November 1999 and October 2000, all of which “included a suicide crash into a high value target.” Records released since that time show that NORAD had practiced 28 hijack exercise events in the 20 months leading up to 9/11. At least six of these were focused on hijackings located entirely within the Unites States, putting to rest the excuse that NORAD was only looking for threats coming from outside of U.S. borders.

One of these exercises, Vigilant Guardian in October 2000, practiced the interception of an airliner hijacked for a suicide attack against the 39-story United Nations building in New York City, just a few blocks from the World Trade Center. Another air defense exercise, called Amalgam Virgo and practiced just three months before 9/11, was accompanied by a planning document that had a picture of Osama bin Laden on the cover.

Many of the war games that were occurring on the day of 9/11 were under the sponsorship of Ralph Eberhart, commander in chief (CINC) of NORAD. Eberhart was in command of the war games that had the greatest impact on the nation’s air defenses and has therefore been named as a suspect in the crimes. Of course, he had help.

NORAD is divided into several large areas that cover the U.S. and Canada, one of which is the region of the continental U.S. called CONR, headed on 9/11 by General Larry Arnold. Within CONR there are three sectors. The 9/11 attacks took place in the airspace monitored by CONR’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS). Personnel at NEADS were therefore primarily responsible for trying to coordinate the NORAD response to the hijackings.

At NEADS, Colonel Robert Marr was in charge. Marr had been in the U.S. Air Force for over 20 years until 1994, at which time he spent a few months in Saudi Arabia as “director of combat operations.”1 He then left the military to work two years for a private company called Phoenix Air. Perhaps coincidentally, Phoenix Air provided aircraft for the Amalgam Virgo exercises.

Investigator Daniel Hopsicker suggested that Phoenix Air was associated with Huffman Aviation where the alleged 9/11 hijackers had trained. Regardless, it is clear that Phoenix Air works for the U.S. deep state. The company has been hired to fly prisoners for the rendition program, was the first to get drone contracts, and enjoyed a unique position flying patients during the ebola scare. More relevant to 9/11 are its abilities to “provide realistic electronic attack (EA) electronic countermeasures (ECM)” and “radar and communications jamming.”

After his stint at Phoenix Air, Marr returned to the military as the exercise coordinator at NEADS. By 9/11, he had risen to the position of commander of the facility.

NORAD planners stated that several exercises were fully or mostly planned as of 9/11. These included Vigilant Guardian and Vigilant Overview, both command post exercises (CPX), and Amalgam Virgo and Amalgam Warrior, which were field training (or FTX) exercises. All four of these exercises were sponsored by CINCNORAD Eberhart.

It is clear that at least one of these planned exercises, Vigilant Guardian, was actually being conducted on 9/11. Additionally, another war game called Apollo Guardian was running on 9/11. This was an exercise conducted by the U.S. Space Command, an agency also being run by Eberhart.

FTX exercises are sometimes what are referred to as SPADEs. The NORAD exercise planners clarified that this means “a track is taken out of radar coverage and then re-introduced as an unknown track.” This exercise feature is interesting given that Flight 77 was lost on radar for a period of time on 9/11 and then reappeared in a way that has not yet been explained.

Amalgam Virgo 02 was a modification of Twin Star, a live-fly joint FAA/NORAD exercise conducted in 1995. Twin Star was described by NORAD exercise manager Major Paul Goddard, who said the plan was to have interceptor jets scramble and escort a hijacked airliner. During the actual exercise, “the fighters never got off on the appropriate heading, and it took them forever to catch up.”

It seems worthwhile to consider that Amalgam Virgo 02, which was reportedly in the final planning stages as of 9/11, might actually have been in play that morning. One reason to consider this is that, on 9/11, the interceptor jets “never got off on the appropriate heading, and it took them forever to catch up.” Another reason is that 9/11 Commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste showed considerable interest in Amalgam Virgo 02, as did the 9/11 Commission staff in its request for documents.

According to Ben-Veniste, this was a case in which “NORAD had already in the works plans to simulate in an exercise a simultaneous hijacking of two planes in the United States.” The plan for Amalgam Virgo 02 was therefore similar to the 9/11 attacks, with multiple, simultaneous hijackings.

Another large-scale exercise being conducted on 9/11 was Global Guardian, a joint nuclear war simulation run by the U.S. Strategic Command (Stratcom) in conjunction with NORAD. This was essentially a practice for Armageddon that involved live nuclear bombs and at least three airborne command and control airliners called E-4Bs.2 The E-4B that was seen circling the White House during the 9/11 attacks might have been part of this exercise.

The 9/11 Commission did not mention most of these exercises in its report. To the contrary, the report mentioned only Vigilant Guardian and then only once, in a deceptively stated footnote that said “On 9/11, NORAD was scheduled to conduct a military exercise, Vigilant Guardian, which postulated a bomber attack from the Soviet Union.”3 This statement is false in several ways, not the least of which is that NORAD was involved in multiple exercises on 9/11. And Vigilant Guardian was not simply an exercise involving one bomber from the former Soviet Union.

Vigilant Guardian 01 (VG) had been in play for several days as of 9/11. On September 9, it included a scenario in which terrorists hijacked an airliner and planned to attack New York City. The exercise presented a number of other scenarios based around airliner hijackings with one threatening to “Rain Terror from the Skies.”

According to the VG planning documents, the 9/11 exercise was to be conducted “sim over live,” meaning the simulated hijackings were to be inserted into the live air control system. This was repeated in the instructions—“Ensure all tracks of interest (sim or live) are input on the live chart.” Furthermore, the VG plan was that “All expansions will be Real World.” Although frequently misunderstood, the term “Real World” does not refer to an actual hijacking, it refers to the use of real aircraft in live-fly exercises.

Due to these confusing circumstances, NEADS staff confused the actual hijackings on 9/11 with the exercises. As researcher Matthew Everett explained, “What is remarkable is that at a time when it should have been obvious to them that the U.S. was in the middle of a major terrorist attack, these key personnel [at NEADS] were uncertain whether what was happening was real or simulated.” The confusion caused NEADS personnel to think the exercises were continuing well after the attacks.

On 9/11, VG was scheduled to include a simulated hijacking at 9:40 a.m., within an hour of when Flight 11 struck the WTC. When they first learned that Flight 11 was hijacked, NEADS staff noted that the “exercise” appeared to be starting an hour early that morning. The evidence indicates that everyone at NEADS, ostensibly including Colonel Marr, thought the actual hijackings were exercises. They even joked about it. That might have been due to the VG plan stating that the NEADS building where Colonel Marr and company were located was a planned “exercise play area” and everyone there, knowingly or not, was “subject to exercise play.”

NEADS radar scopes were displaying simulated information at least until the time of the Pentagon attack. The same problem was going on at Cheyenne Mountain Operations Center (CMOC), another exercise play area, with radar screens showing false tracks as late as 10:12. In fact, personnel at CMOC called NEADs in an attempt to stop the exercise inputs. Because those inputs did not stop, it appeared that someone wanted the NEADS and CMOC radar scopes to continue showing false information until after the four hijacked planes had been destroyed.

NORAD exercise manager Ken Merchant added that the NMCC, located at the Pentagon, regularly participated in NORAD exercises by interjecting emergency action messages (EAMs). On 9/11, the performance of the NMCC, which plays a critical role in establishing the military chain of command and communicating orders, was remarkably poor. Officers there lacked any sense of urgency and were completely ineffective with regard to communications.

The disruptive effect of the ongoing NORAD exercises that morning continued until after all the hijacked planes had crashed. One military newspaper said VG continued until 30 minutes after attacks. Similarly, Global Guardian was “formally terminated” at 10:44 a.m. but certain actions taken after that time, including that the CMOC’s blast doors were closed (a needless action in response to hijacked airliners), suggested that the exercise continued.

More investigation is needed into the planning and effects of the war games being conducted on 9/11. The role of Colonel Robert Marr, for example, and his former employer Phoenix Air, should be examined much more closely. Additionally, the possibility that Amalgam Virgo 02, a planned exercise that mimicked the sequence of events on 9/11, should be considered.

1] 9/11 Commission, Memorandum for the Record: Interview with Colonel Robert Marr, prepared by Geoffrey Brown, January 23, 2004

2] Joe Dejka, Inside StratCom on September 11 Offutt exercise took real-life twist, The Omaha World-Herald, February 27, 2002

3] National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, Thomas H. Kean, Lee Hamilton, 9/11 Commission Report, Notes to Chapter 1, footnote 116

 

Posted in 9/11, 9/11 Suspects | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Real Americans Question 9/11

These days it’s difficult to remember what values the American people share. That’s because the U.S. government does so many things that seem to contradict basic human values. Wars of aggression, torture, kidnapping and indefinite detention, warrantless wiretapping, and other oppressions have become standard operational procedure for the U.S. government. Those who recognize and seek to correct this system of abuse soon realize that the key to doing so is to reveal the truth behind the primary driver for all of them—the crimes of 9/11.

It’s important to know what makes someone an American and what does not. Here are some examples of what does not make someone an American.

  • Loyalty to the flag
  • Respect for the national anthem
  • Serving in the military or honoring military veterans
  • Paying taxes

A person can do these things to any extent possible and it will not make them any more American than they were before they began. Popular culture and corporate media make every effort to present American patriotism as a sum of these kinds of activities but it is easy to see through that false front.

Only one thing makes someone an American and that is support and defense of the U.S. Constitution. The founding fathers of the United States defined Americans as those who are committed to the ideals of the Constitution. To this day, anyone claiming to represent the nation must swear an oath to uphold those ideals.

Each president, when taking office, affirms that he will “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” All congress members must swear or affirm that they will “support and defend the Constitution.”

All new citizens of the United States and every member of the U.S. military must swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;” and that they “will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.”

The U.S. Constitution is comprised of articles that spell out the government’s powers and the process of making amendments. It also includes the 27 amendments that exist today. The first ten amendments, ratified four years after the original text, are known as the Bill of Rights. These include the freedoms of speech, religion, and the press. Also, there are the rights to bear arms, to privacy, and to a speedy and public trial. The rejection of cruel and unusual punishment is another basic tenet of the U.S. Constitution.

Unfortunately, virtually every Article and Amendment of the Constitution has been under attack since September 11, 2001. Yet very few people have risen to support or defend it. In fact, many so-called Americans have encouraged assaults on the core American values.

That abuse began with the violation of Article 1 of the Constitution that rejects starting wars of aggression without having been “actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay.” Instead of working to determine what actually happened on 9/11 and thereby defend the nation, the Bush Administration immediately invaded Afghanistan, a country that it had planned to invade long before the 9/11 attacks. Sixteen months later, the government invaded Iraq based on what everyone now knows was a pack of lies.

Americans who questioned that anti-American approach were silenced with claims that they were not “supporting the troops” if they did not consent to the growing greed-fueled militarism. The Afghanistan invasion was coupled with the passing of the Patriot Act—an attack on basic Constitutional rights and a failure to preserve those rights as described in Article 2.

In 2006, national polls showed that over one third of Americans believed that federal officials assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so that the United States could go to war in the Middle East. At the same time, Americans witnessed a growing list of abuses of their Constitutional rights. These abuses violated the Bill of Rights in nearly every way and were driven by unproven claims about what happened on September 11, 2001.

On the tenth anniversary of 9/11, the Center for Constitutional Rights described how the Constitution had been shredded based on assumptions about the 9/11 attacks. By then, it had also become clear that the government was actually giving aid and comfort to the enemy (violating Article 3) through arming and training terrorists. One might think it obvious that stopping such actions would be the goal of all Americans but to do so one Congress member has had to spell it out in legislation.

Failing to protect Americans against domestic violence (a violation of Article 4), the FBI was found to actually be manufacturing terrorism. It was further learned that some FBI leaders had been facilitating or sponsoring terrorism since long before 9/11. This practice continues today and the manufactured plots have become so obvious that officials are finding it difficult to explain why Americans should take them seriously.

Attorney and author John W. Whitehead detailed the continuing attacks on the Bill of Rights by writing that,

“What began with the passage of the USA Patriot Act in October 2001 has snowballed into the eradication of every vital safeguard against government overreach, corruption and abuse. Since then, we have been terrorized, traumatized, and tricked into a semi-permanent state of compliance. The bogeyman’s names and faces change over time—Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and now ISIS—but the end result remains the same: our unquestioning acquiescence to anything the government wants to do in exchange for the phantom promise of safety and security.”

The attacks on American values have been so extensive that people often no longer notice how bad it has become. For example, the government has named those captured and tortured in the name of 9/11 as “forever prisoners”—a term that exemplifies the hatred of freedom represented by the new phony Americanism. The fact that one of these men was a central character in building the official account of 9/11 and has since been exonerated for any involvement in those crimes makes no difference.

How can real Americans respond to this ongoing assault against the Constitution by flag-waving, militaristic, greed-driven fools? How can we “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic” by “bearing true faith and allegiance to the same?”

To end the wave of anti-Americanism that began with the crimes of 9/11, Americans have two options. The first is to stand up publicly and fight the attacks on our Constitution by helping everyone understand that the crimes of 9/11 have not been solved. In fact, there are still so many unanswered questions about those crimes that everything done in “response” is almost certainly a crime in itself.

The second option is to end the tyranny through revolution. This was how America began, of course, and that great beginning is enshrined in the precursor to the Constitution—the Declaration of Independence. At the time, the founders stated that, “When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

As Americans it is our duty to throw off the tyrannical abuses of power that are threatening to end America. That duty starts with questioning 9/11—the driver behind all of it.

Posted in 9/11, Terrorism | 9 Comments

Ten Short Videos About Nine Eleven

1.  On the day of the attacks, firefighters testified to explosives planted in the World Trade Center buildings. This video was among those held secret for years by the government agency NIST and released via FOIA after public interest died down.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IO1ps1mzU8o

  1. The collapse of WTC 7, a 47-story building that was not hit by an airplane, looked exactly like a controlled demolition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A49a9pXwDQs

  1. News agencies, including BBC and CNN, announced the destruction of WTC 7 long before it happened. One BBC reporter announced the collapse while viewers could see the still-standing building right behind her in the video. Her news feed was cut when the problem was discovered.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=677i43QfYpQ

  1. Physics teacher David Chandler explained that the Twin Towers were demolished by explosive demolition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUDoGuLpirc

  1. There were many eyewitnesses to explosives at the WTC.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUXGhLrDqb0

  1. Senator Mark Dayton testified that, if the 9/11 Commission Report was true, those in command of the national air defenses did not do their jobs and many lied about it afterward. Of course, Senator Dayton was probably wrong in his claims that all military officers had been lying for years because a much simpler explanation is that the 9/11 Commission was lying.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkukTCi5zSc

  1. Clips from the film Loose Change describe how military exercises and vice presidential orders obstructed the national air defense response.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViZjSe8C92U

  1. President George W. Bush could not respond to the claim that his administration knew about the attacks before they happened.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1R72hs7RaE

  1. Investigative journalist James Corbett was able to portray, in just five minutes, the absurdity of the official conspiracy theory.

http://www.corbettreport.com/911-a-conspiracy-theory/

  1. The victim’s families explained how their efforts were the only driver for any official investigation and how that investigation failed them completely.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soKXF63itMQ

Posted in 9/11 | 4 Comments

Is Trump a God?

Recently author Ursula K. Le Guin wrote a letter to The Oregonian rebutting a claim that “alternative facts” used by the Trump Administration were comparable to science fiction. As a lifelong fan of Le Guin, this reminded me of a revolutionary idea from one of her older books. Trump’s alternative facts can be seen as a logical extension of the falsehoods that Americans have come to accept but the level of his deception has led him to an elevated status.

Le Guin’s letter made it clear that fiction writers “make stuff up” in transparent ways in order to produce art through the use of imagination. Conversely, the alternative facts used by Trump and his minions are simply lies told to mislead people for personal or political gain. That is, fiction is not deception because it begins with the admission that what is said or written is not true. Unlike fiction, Trump’s alternative facts are presented as true but are simply lies that drive a political agenda. His obvious lies and unprecedented public animosity toward the mainstream media, intelligence agencies, and almost everyone else, appear to make Trump either a fool or a great agent of change.

This reminds me of Le Guin’s 1972 book The Word for World is Forest, an early precursor to the more recent movie Avatar. In the book, Earth men attempt to take over another world in order to cut down the forests for wood. The people of that other world, called Athsheans, ultimately fight back against their enslavement and the pillaging of their world. The revolution is led and won by an Athshean man called Selver.

Both Selver and Davidson—the most brutal of the Earth men—were called gods by the Athsheans. Selver described why. “Sometimes a god comes,” Selver said. “He brings a new way to do a thing, or a new thing to be done. When he has done this, it is done. You cannot take things that exist in the world and try to drive them back into the dream, to hold them inside the dream with walls and pretenses. That is insanity. What is, is. There is no use pretending, now, that we do not know how to kill one another.”

Selver brought a new way of thinking and doing things by showing the Athsheans how to kill people when they were faced with slavery and the destruction of their world. Davidson brought a form of careless brutality and killing for personal gain that Athsheans had never seen before. Once these new ways of thinking were realized, there was no way to go back to an earlier, less violent mindset.

trump-godSimilarly, it seems that Trump brings a new way of thinking, or more correctly, a way of not thinking. Although he is not the first politician to use deception to drive policy or the first to ask citizens to ignore his lies, he has raised the bar significantly. Trump’s lies are so obvious and absurd that they represent an unabashed mindlessness that has never been considered possible for a U.S. president. If he is successful in holding to a pattern of lies that require no reconciliation with fact, his new form of not thinking could become the norm for American society and the world. Therefore, Trump might be a god as defined in Le Guin’s book.

The fact checking website Politifact has shown that more than 70% of Trump’s public statements, and many other statements related to him, were false. Considering that the same statistic for Obama was only 26%, this is an astounding increase in presidential falsehoods.

Yet Trump’s unapologetic, bald-faced lying can be seen as merely the next step in an evolution of willful ignorance among Americans. That is, years of selective ignorance among large segments of the public have led to the possibility that Americans are ready and willing to be lied to about most everything. And it seems that Trump is ready to test that hypothesis.

Trump’s lies about terrorism demonstrate this well. He and his team lie constantly about threats of terrorism. They made up a “Bowling Green Massacre,” made false insinuations about Swedish terrorism, and claimed that Atlanta was the site of a recent major terrorist attack. Trump claimed that terrorism and terrorist attacks in the United States and Europe “have gotten to a point where it’s not even being reported.” To back up that claim, Trump posted a list of 78 murders and other crimes that had been previously reported, insulting victims’ families in the process.

When lying about terrorism, Trump does what both Bush and Obama did before him—he invokes the crimes of 9/11 as the starting point. Therein lies the root of the deception that Trump’s predecessors fostered and that he is simply manipulating to a mindless crescendo.

Even Le Guin appears to have been caught up in the deception that led to the Trump phenomenon. In her 2003 collection of short stories, Changing Planes, her author’s note talked about the misery of air travel and how it was not helped [after 9/11] by “bigots with beards in caves,” alluding to the myth of Osama bin Laden.

To be fair to Le Guin, in 2003 most people were not aware of the deceptions behind 9/11. Today, however, many Americans are aware of the falsehoods that make up the official accounts of the 9/11 crimes. We cannot forget the lies about the air defenses that day and the claim that the U.S. military spent years lying to us in inexplicable ways. We know the World Trade Center buildings were destroyed by explosive demolition and we are aware of many other facts about 9/11 that indicate that Americans must have been involved.

Those who are aware of the deception behind 9/11 see its power everyday. For example, we know that the mainstream media lies to us about 9/11 regularly. We also know that people who reveal deception in science cannot see the one most glaring example available. We know that intelligence officers whose job it is to reveal when people are being deceptive cannot see the most obvious examples that relate to 9/11. These behaviors could be the result of intentional censorship but it is clear that a significant level of self-deception, and therefore self-censorship, is involved when it comes to the subject of terrorism.

Nonetheless, American’s fear of the truth behind 9/11 has led to a lack of interest in the subject and has allowed government-sponsored terrorism to become a fact of everyday life. Every year we see the same pattern of falsehoods surrounding terrorist acts and the same inability of media or government leaders to address the falsehoods. This has made it easy for Donald Trump to step up the deception.

Perhaps the next terrorist event will make Trump an emperor god and allow him to implement all of his oppressive and isolationist policies without objection. Even so he is not the kind of god that Ursula Le Guin wrote about because he has not brought us a new way of thinking. He has simply proposed elevating our society to a new height of mindlessness that is a natural extension of the path we have followed and accepted for years.

Posted in 9/11, Terrorism | Tagged , | 8 Comments

New President: Get Ready for Terrorism

Governments have terrorized their own people many times in history. They do so in order to rally support around policies that the public would not otherwise support like increased militarization and restrictions on civil liberties. In the United States, terrorism climaxes during the year a new president takes office. These facts, along with the historically low approval ratings for President Trump, suggest that the U.S. should be prepared for a major terrorist event in the near future.

trump-shootsIn the last 24 years, every new U.S. presidency has been accompanied by increased acts of government-sponsored terrorism in its first year. It began with the 1993 WTC bombing only a month after the inauguration of Bill Clinton. As the New York Times reported at the time, it was clear that the FBI was involved in the WTC plot. According to an FBI informer, agents knew the bombing would happen and helped to prepare the explosives.

CBS News also reported that the informer had recorded many of his conversations with the Bureau and that those tapes were very incriminating. Apparently the tapes, which were never revealed to the public, went into significant detail about the FBI’s coordination of the bomb building.

In the years leading up to 9/11, the FBI’s support for terrorism continued. The Bureau failed miserably at preventing terrorism when preventing terrorism was its primary goal. Moreover, the actions of FBI leadership suggest that it was facilitating and covering-up acts of terrorism. When 9/11 happened, some agents accused their own agency of being responsible.

It is widely recognized that the crimes of 9/11 rescued George W. Bush from rapidly declining public and media support in his first year as president. After the attacks, his approval ratings rose 35% and his administration was able to implement many pre-planned policies that the public would otherwise have never supported including the Patriot Act and several wars. Evidence that Bush Administration members were involved in the attacks and the subsequent cover-up has become compelling.

In 2009, the first year of the Obama presidency, TIME reported that domestic terrorism hit a peak. While the government claimed to have foiled many of the alleged terrorist plots that year, news coverage of the events kept terrorism in the forefront of the public mindset.

By 2011, even mainstream media sources were catching on. Journalist Glenn Greenwald reported in Salon that the cases in which the FBI had supposedly stopped terrorist plots were actually instances of the FBI plotting terrorist acts and entrapping the young, naive suspects.

In the past few years acts of domestic terrorism in Western countries have exhibited a formulaic set of features. The pattern observed suggests that most or all of the incidents were false flag events. Meanwhile, the FBI and CIA were found to be engaging in contemptible abuses of American justice during the military trial of alleged 9/11 conspirators. Those abuses indicated that U.S. intelligence agencies have a vested interest in covering-up the truth about 9/11.

Last year, suspicions about FBI cover-up of the 9/11 attacks continued. New acts of domestic terrorism displayed the same indications of FBI involvement that have been common since 1993.  Moreover, the group Human Rights Watch has documented that government agents are now “directly involved” in most U.S. terror plots.

As knowledge of the past grows, it is possible that citizens will prepare for opportunities to expose government-sponsored terrorism. For example, almost everyone has a cell phone with a video camera that connects directly to the internet. Once a terrorist event is first reported, it is feasible for those in the vicinity of the crime to document what is happening in order to better refute what is likely to become an obviously false official account. Citizen reporters could talk to eyewitnesses and photograph suspects and physical evidence, helping to reveal the deception.

With President Trump spiraling downward in public opinion polls, it seems that the only way to recover public support for his new government is through a major act of terrorism. Although this is a frightening prospect, and one that is predicted by the last 24 years of U.S. history, the next major terrorist attack could be the one that results in revelations that cannot be ignored. Whether this year or another, the public will eventually realize that willful ignorance of terrorism drives many of society’s biggest problems.

Posted in 9/11, Terrorism | 14 Comments

Terror and Propaganda in 2016

There were only three alleged terrorist events in the United States in 2016 and only one resulted in deaths. That is not reason to celebrate, however, as it is clear that many Americans have not learned much about terrorism since 9/11. Moreover, the U.S. will see a new president that desperately needs to improve his public image and it should be considered how that was accomplished for George W. Bush. A review of U.S. terrorist events since last December is therefore worthwhile as is a look at one of the leading propagandists behind the nation’s terrorism narrative.

The one fatal terrorist incident in 2016 was the June shooting in an Orlando nightclub that ended in the deaths of 50 people. It was the deadliest act of terrorism in the United States since 9/11. The two other attacks were non-fatal but features of the attacks and the official accounts given reflected a familiar pattern in U.S terrorist events.

mateenIn Orlando, the suspect was quickly killed and the official account immediately attempted to blame Islam. However, there were some alarming unanswered questions about the suspect including that he had posed in “selfies” wearing clothes with NYPD insignias. Additionally, Mateen worked for a security firm, G4S, that operated like a special operations military outfit and was linked to many other terrorist acts including 9/11. It was assumed to be a coincidence that the FBI had assessed Mateen’s potential for terrorism on at least three separate occasions prior to the attack.

Questions persisted about the Orlando incident and it was later revealed that at least seven police officers showed up during the shooting but were ordered to stand down and leave the building as the attack proceeded. This was despite protocols developed after the Columbine attack that required officers to go after the shooter.

A few months passed before there were bombings in New York and New Jersey. On September 17th, a pipe bomb exploded in a trash can near the site of a 5K run event in Seaside Park, NJ. Three more pipe bombs were found scattered around the course. Later that day, a pressure cooker bomb exploded in a dumpster 85 miles away, in Manhattan. A few hours after that, another pressure cooker bomb was located a few blocks away. Several pipe bombs were found the following day—21 miles from Manhattan in a backpack on top of a municipal garbage can in Elizabeth, NJ.

The FBI said that an American citizen named Ahmad Rahimi was behind all ten of the bombs in the three different cities. Why the bombs were all placed in isolated trash containers, thereby causing limited damage, was never explained. The Bureau said that Rahimi was inspired by Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki.

Incredibly, the suspect’s father had called the FBI two years earlier, claiming that his son was acting like a terrorist. This led the FBI to conduct a “review—checking its databases, contacting other agencies and conducting interviews” but yet find nothing that “warranted further inquiry.”

The charges against Mr. Rahimi, who was shot seven times while being apprehended, are largely based on a personal journal authorities reportedly found on him. The journal, convenient for building the case to say the least, is said to detail plans for the bombs as well as the suspect’s terrorist ideology and his love for terrorists like Osama bin Laden. Mr. Rahimi has pleaded not guilty.

The final incident, in November, appeared to be the result of mental illness but was attributed to Islamic terrorism. An Ohio State University student—a Somalian who was a legal resident of the U.S.—drove his car into a crowd and then began stabbing people. Although the university said the suspect was only 18 years old, law enforcement officials said he was inspired by the terrorist propaganda of ISIL and Anwar Al-Awlaki. “ISIL” claimed responsibility despite there being no evidence of any contact between it and the accused.

Today, the fear instilled by the reporting of terrorist acts in the U.S. is hugely disproportionate to the actual risk presented. Only fear of government corruption is higher than fear of a domestic terrorist attack. The two fears are related, of course, and the pattern of terrorism in 2016 repeated that of 2015, further suggesting that these acts might be government sponsored.

Does the FBI continue to manufacture domestic terrorism as has been claimed in the past? Are operatives trained in special operations actually committing the terrorism while the FBI and professional propagandists concoct dubious official accounts?

An outstanding example is the San Bernardino shooting of December 2015. This was an attack in which all of the eyewitnesses were ignored in favor of an official account that still cannot be made to pass the red-face test. Furthermore, known terror propagandists have been involved in bolstering the official account.

Recently, the Los Angeles Times reported that, a year after the San Bernardino shooting, “federal officials acknowledge they still don’t have answers to some of the critical questions.” San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan said, “We never established the motive. The best we can do is theorize.”

Theorize? That sounds familiar. Here’s a theory. The terror expert that the Times has quoted all year long is simply stoking the fear of terrorism, as he has done for decades, and distracting everyone from the facts of the case.

That expert, Brian Michael Jenkins, is himself a suspect in terrorism. In 1993, the editor of The Humanist called Jenkins “one of the architects of the contra war against Nicaragua—a terror war aimed primarily at the civilian population and infrastructure.”[1] A former special operations soldier and the man who designed the security system for the World Trade Center before it was destroyed, Jenkins is also named in the book Another Nineteen: Investigation Legitimate 9/11 Suspects. Apparently not distressed by the attention, Jenkins has posted a related article on his own website.

Immediately after the San Bernardino shooting, Jenkins began to be cited as the authority on the event in many media venues. The Guardian published Jenkins’ opinion piece that discussed visa programs, social media, and other risks in light of the shooting. The Atlantic employed him as its expert to explain how the internet can cause people to become “self-radicalized” (i.e. in the absence of any real associations with terrorism).

Jenkins continued to be the expert on the subject of the San Bernardino shooting and the new theory of self-radicalization. He appeared in articles for the LA Times (several times), the LA Daily News, local television reports, the Dallas News, the Associated Press, and others. In the most recent article by the LA Times, Jenkins described the two official suspects in the San Bernardino shooting. “They are essentially homegrown terrorists, self–radicalized and inspired by those overseas,” Jenkins said.

Of course, people who have followed the news in detail still wonder about facts that contradict the official San Bernardino account. For example, the evidence suggests that the attackers were three white men who appeared to be special operations soldiers.

At the time of the attack, a Los Angeles television station stated: “Police looking for 3 white males dressed in military gear.” The only eyewitness to the shootings said the perpetrators were three tall, athletic, white men in combat-style gear. The witnesses to the getaway said they saw three men in black masks fleeing the scene with rifles in hand. Another said it was three white men in military gear. The attackers got into a black SUV with tinted windows and “calmly” left the scene.

It is certain that a black SUV was shot up badly later in the day. However, no convincing evidence was ever produced showing how the accused were driving or shooting from the SUV. Moreover, the attorney representing the family said the accused appear to have been handcuffed and lying face down in the vehicle when found.

It was reported that the FBI was getting resistance from Apple in unlocking the suspect’s phone, causing a challenge to privacy rights. The truth was later revealed to be that the FBI had somehow reset the suspect’s iPhone password, making it impossible for Apple to access the phone’s content via cloud. Additionally, the suspect’s computer hard drive went missing. In other words, the FBI continues to hold the remaining evidence.

Nonetheless, the media frenzy in support of the official account soon became an entrenched myth. Even as the New York Times retracted its reporting on the subject and the Washington Post admitted that American law enforcement officials were “famous for feeding contradictory and unfounded information to the media,” the myth continued to go unchallenged.

On the 15th anniversary of 9/11, Brian Michael Jenkins co-authored a lead piece for The Atlantic that asked, How Much Really Changed About Terrorism on 9/11? His fellow contributors were Bruce Hoffman and Martha Crenshaw, terror propagandists associated with those of Cercle Pinay and the Washington Institute for the Study of Conflict. The article discussed how to predict who would become a terrorist and exaggerated the power and influence of “terrorist groups.” The authors argue that the only things that have really changed since 9/11 are that the stakes are higher, the terrorists are more capable, and we have not learned much.

It is true that many people have not learned much about terrorism since 9/11. That’s partly because the public is continually misinformed about every terrorist act and partly because people willfully ignore the evidence they do encounter. As terror propagandists and suspected terrorists continue to control the narrative, the future might provide more serious examples of this absurd and dangerous state of affairs.

[1] Gerry O’Sullivan, Boom!, The Humanist, May 1993.

Postscript: The July 7, 2016 shooting in Dallas that killed five police officers was not considered terrorism by U.S. officials although skepticism is reasonable considering the contradictions in official accounts.

Posted in 9/11 Suspects | 1 Comment