THE PENTAGON ATTACK PAPERS: THE TERROR CONSPIRACY

Source: http://physics911.net/pdf/honegger.pdf

THE PENTAGON ATTACK PAPERS
Updated January 2011
by
Barbara Honegger
Earlier edition Appendix to
THE TERROR CONSPIRACY
by Jim Marrs
Barbara Honegger, M.S. is Senior Military Affairs Journalist with the Naval Postgraduate School
(1995-present), DoD’s graduate science, technology, national security and homeland security
research university. This White Paper, as all of the author’s research, publications and presentations
on September 11th, are in her capacity as a private citizen and do not imply official endorsement.
The author served as Special Assistant to the Assistant to the President and White House Policy
Analyst (1981-83); was the pioneering Irangate author and whistleblower on the October Surprise
(October Surprise, Tudor, 1989); was featured in the Iran-Contra expose documentary “Cover-Up”;
and was called as an investigator-witness at both the October 23, 2004 and August 27, 2005
Los Angeles Citizens 9/11 Grand Jury hearings held at Patriotic Hall in Los Angeles, Calif.
Much of the information and analysis contained in this evidence and analysis summary was
presented at the L.A. Grand Juries and at numerous 9/11 Truth conferences throughout the US.
World 9/11 Truth authority Prof. David Ray Griffin has included the core finding of this white paper
– evidence for inside-the-building explosives at the Pentagon on 9/11 paralleling the alreadywell-
known inside-the building explosives at the WTC in New York – in his latest and most
definitive book on the September 11th attacks, The New Pearl Harbor Revisited (Chapter 2,
‘Reports of Bombs’). In a previous book, Prof. Griffin said that any serious reinvestigation of 9/11
should include the information and analysis contained in this White Paper. Honegger’s two-hour
under-oath videotaped interview/testimony of key Pentagon eyewitness April Gallop, cited in the
below, provided the basis for a critical 9/11 lawsuit filed in Manhattan on Dec. 15, 2008.
The San Francisco Chronicle commemorated the 100th anniversary of
the Great California 1906 Earthquake with front-page articles featuring a single
iconic image -- a charred clock frozen in time at 5:12 a.m. -- the exact moment
“The Big One” hit.1 Over a century after that devastating event, this stopped clock
still serves as the ultimate evidence and the historic icon that “captures it all.”
Another series of clocks and watches frozen in time at the exact moment
of the first violent event at the Pentagon on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001 also
“capture it all” and serve as the ultimate evidence shattering the official theory
of what happened there that terrible morning – and narrows the range of who
was really responsible for the horrific acts.
Converging Lines of Evidence of a 9:30-to-9:32 a.m. Inside Violent Event
at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001 well before the Official Story says
anything approached and hit the building
The Pentagon was first attacked shortly after 9:30 a.m. – almost
8 minutes before the official ‘impact’ time of 9:37:46, when the Official
Conspiracy Theory (OCT) says a plane hit the building from the outside.
Both DoD and mainstream media initially reported the time of the
alleged Flight 77 impact similarly, as “about 9:30”, but government censors
quickly began moving the alleged outside strike time later and later.1B
Some early reports of the alleged impact time quoting official sources were
as late as 10:00. The time given by Pentagon officials for the claimed outside
impact on the building finally “settled” at 9:37:47, or almost 9:38.
Multiple standard-issue battery- and electric-operated wall clocks
in the heliport just outside the west wall and in the inside areas of
the Pentagon attacked on 9/11 were stopped between 9:30 and 9:32.
as a result of the first violent event
The Navy, itself part of ‘the Pentagon’, posted a photo of a Pentagon
wall clock stopped at 9:31:40 on one of its official websites; and the Pentagon
wall clock chosen for the national 9/11 exhibit at the Smithsonian Institution
was stopped at 9:31:30.2 These are just some of the west-section Pentagon
clocks that were stopped shortly after 9:30 on Sept. 11, 2001.
In addition, April Gallop’s wrist watch was stopped “just after 9:30”
April Gallop, an Army employee with a Top Secret clearance
specializing in the declassification of documents was at her desk in the
Army area in the west section of the Pentagon on 9/11, the part of the
building most heavily destroyed and with the most casualties, when what
she said sounded and felt “like a bomb” went off, soon followed by a
second explosion. According to the Pentagon’s own building performance
report researched and completed in the wake of the attacks, Gallop’s desk
was approx. 30 feet from the alleged inside trajectory of the alleged
impactor plane.
“Being in the Army with the training I had, I know what a bomb
sounds and acts like, especially the aftermath, and it sounded and acted like
a bomb,” Gallop told the author in an under-oath videotaped interview.2A
“There was no plane or plane parts inside the building, and no smell of jet
fuel.” In those two hours of under-oath videotaped testimony, Gallop states
that the explosion went off at the precise instant that she hit the ‘power on’
button on her computer in the Army area, to which she had just returned
that morning after some months of pregnancy and childbirth leave, and
that the first explosion stopped her wrist watch “just after 9:30 a.m.” 2B
She has kept the stopped wrist watch in a safe deposit box as evidence
of the exact moment of the initial Pentagon explosion. (Significantly,
one of the witnesses to an inside-the-building explosion going off at the
Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City separate from the well known
outside Ryder truck bomb, Jane Graham, went on record to host Bonnie
Faulkner in a Pacifica KPFA radio interview that the moment she also
pressed the on button on her computer at her desk inside the building,
an internal explosion went off.2C The parallel inside-bomb-with-outsideattack-
cover-story modus operandi of the Murrah Building and Pentagon
attacks point to the same inside perpetrators as being responsible for the
planning and execution of both.)
The huge explosion and massive damage experienced by Gallop
at/by her desk inside the west section only about 30 feet from the alleged
‘entrance’ hole of the claimed impactor, combined with the fact that the
Pentagon's thick west outer wall had just been fortified to withstand
damage from an external bomb and/or external impactor, make it almost
certain that the explosion and internal damage experienced by Gallop
and other witnesses came -- at least first -- from inside, not outside,
the building.
Some 9/11 researchers, notably Jim Hoffman, have studied the
evidence surrounding the Pentagon attack and, though acknowledging
evidence for an explosion not explained by a plane impact or resultant
jet fuel combustion, nevertheless claim a Boeing 757 or similarly sized
aircraft probably hit the building, based predominantly on witnesses
who say they saw a large plane approach and impact the west wedge.
For such witnesses to believe the incoming plane hit the building,
however, the large smoke cloud could not have already been billowing
up and above the Pentagon; had it been, they would have known it was
due to some other, prior cause. Thus, if the early 9:30-9:32 inside
explosions were the cause of the fireball and smoke cloud, any plane
that witnesses saw approaching and believed hit the building had to
have approached near-simultaneously with the cause of the cloud,
or just after 9:30 -- no where close to the 9:37:46 official story alleged
impact time.
Other 9/11 researchers, notably the Citizens Investigation Team
(CIT), assume as fact the author’s original finding that inside-the-building
explosion(s) caused the fireball and billowing black smoke cloud which
only some of the CIT witnesses say they saw immediately after a large
plane passed to the north of the Citgo gas station, contrary to the official
story which claims a plane hit the light poles while approaching south of
the Citgo station. But CIT’s witnesses for the north-of-the-station path
don’t give a time for the plane’s approach, and CIT’s website and videos
assume that time to be just before the official story alleged impact time
of 9:37:46. But this is almost certainly not the case. If the internal
explosion causing the fireball and smoke cloud happened just after 9:30,
as compellingly supported by the evidence here, so also must have the
approach of the plane that CIT’s witnesses saw to the north of the Citgo
station -- not at the much later official impact time of almost 9:38.
It is important here to note that internal explosion(s) between 9:30
and 9:32 a.m. on the first and/or second floors of the west wedge of the
Pentagon are not inconsistent with there possibly having also been a
near-simultaneous and/or later impact by some airborne object much
smaller than a 757/Flight 77 -- a piloted plane, an unmanned drone, or
a missile -- into the same or a nearby section of the building. Indeed,
if a heat-seeking missile hit the building following the explosion(s),
the heat from the earlier explosion(s) would have become the target
for the missile. (See below for reports that A-3 Sky Warrior planes
were retrofitted shortly before 9/11 enabling them to be remotely
controlled, and fitted with missiles.) More specifically, if a missile
approached along the south-of-the-Citgo-station “light pole” path and
hit the west side heat target where the explosives had already gone off
just as the plane CIT’s witnesses saw approach along the north-of-thestation
path overflew the building through the smoke cloud, it would
explain why some of CIT’s witnesses believed the plane caused the
impact noise actually caused by the simultaneously-hitting missile.
As further evidence of internal explosions at the Pentagon on 9/11,
survivor witnesses from inside the west section reported that the blast
caused its newly-hardened windows to first expand outwards, and then
inwards, consistent with an internal-explosion-caused pressure wave.7
And the outermost columns closest to where the official story says the
right wing of a 757 crashed into the building appear to be blown up and
out from the inside, not inward, in photos.
Multiple witnesses also said they smelled cordite after the initial
explosion at the Pentagon, an explosive which has a distinct and very
different smell from that of burning jet fuel, which would have been
the smell if Flight 77 had hit and entered the building. And, as already
noted, Gallop said there was no smell of jet fuel inside the most-damaged
section of the West wedge, where she worked in the Army area, shortly
after the first violent event that stopped her watch there just after 9:30.
Pentagon eyewitness Don Perkal stated to MSNBC, “Even before stepping
outside, I could smell the cordite. I knew explosives had been set off
somewhere.” Witness Gilah Goldsmith reported, “We saw a huge
black cloud of smoke. It smelled like cordite, or gun smoke.” And witness
Samuel Danner, an AmTrak electrical engineer, was at the site and said
he smelled cordite.8 Cordite N -- which consists of the main explosive
compounds nitroguanidine, nitrocellulose, and nitroglycerin -- is coolburning
and produces little smoke and no flash but, like other explosives,
produces a strong detonation shock wave. Several witnesses also reported
seeing a bright silvery flash, which is inconsistent with either jet fuel
combustion from a plane impact, which produces a bright yellow not a
white or silvery fireball, or with cordite explosions which are not
accompanied by a flash.
Even Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld told Sam Donaldson in an
ABC News interview shortly after 9/11 that his first thought, being in
the building when the initial attack happened, was that a bomb had gone
off. Donaldson asked, “What did you think it was?” Rumsfeld replied,
“A bomb?”
The author also interviewed the taxi driver whose cab is the only
car visible still parked on I-395 above the Pentagon lawn looking down
at the west face after the other cars have left the freeway (not Lloyd
England). This taxi can be seen in overhead photos taken on the morning
of 9/11 and viewable on the Internet. The driver said his was the last car
allowed onto that section of I-395 before police put up a barricade and
that he decided not to immediately leave the scene like the others “because
I realized this was history and I wanted to see for myself.” He stated that
he saw no evidence of a plane having hit the building nor any visible plane
pieces on the lawn at the time he arrived, which was after the first violent
event had occurred at the building, as black smoke was already streaming
up and to the right from inside-the-building fires. The taxi cab driver drew
a diagram of what he saw that morning while overlooking the Pentagon’s
west face from I-395, which the author has retained.
The author has interviewed an Army auditor from Ft. Monmouth,
New Jersey, who was on temporary duty assignment at the Pentagon before,
on and after 9/11. He was in the Army financial management spaces only
minutes before the Pentagon explosion on the morning of 9/11. He had just
returned to his temporary office on the ground floor of the adjacent south
side of the Pentagon by the cafeteria when he heard an explosion and felt the
building shake. Immediately afterwards, he said, hundreds of panicked
Pentagon personnel ran by him down the corridor just outside his office
and out the South Entrance, yelling “Bombs!” and “A bomb went off!”
The witness has requested that his name not be used in this evidence
summary, but is willing to testify to a grand jury or independent official
investigation; his name and contact information have been provided to
Prof. David Ray Griffin as bona fides for the ‘Reports of Bombs’ section
of the chapter on the Pentagon attack, Chapter 2, in Griffin’s book
The New Pearl Harbor Revisited, as has the two-hour under-oath testimony
interview with April Gallop.
This Army financial management/audit area was part of or contiguous
to the Army personnel office, and this general Army administrative area was
one of the two west wedge functions most heavily damaged and with the
greatest number of fatalities in the Pentagon attack -- the other being the
Naval Command Center, more of which below. The day before 9/11, on
September 10, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld had publicly announced and
acknowledged that the Pentagon was “missing” – that it allegedly could
not account for and needed to “find” -- $2.3 Trillion dollars (other reports
have put the amount at $2.6 Trillion). Were some of the auditors who
could “follow the money” -- and the computers whose data mining could
help them do it -- intentionally targeted by the inside-the-building explosions
at the Pentagon on September 11th ? In his books, Professor Griffin states
that this possibility, first suggested based on publicly known circumstantial
evidence by the author, deserves serious investigation. It is worth noting
that the Pentagon’s top financial officer leading up to and at the time of
the attacks, Dov Zakheim, who also acknowledged the “missing” Trillions,
had a company specializing in aircraft remote-control technology. As some
analyses claim a part found in the Pentagon wreckage is the front-hub
assembly of the front compressor of a JT8D turbojet engine used in the
A-3 Sky Warrior jet fighter,5 and as Air Force A-3 Sky Warriors -- normally
piloted planes -- were reportedly secretly retrofitted into remote-controlled
drones and fitted with missiles in a highly-compartmented operation at
an airport near Ft. Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport in Colorado in
the months before 9/11,6 the question further arises as to whether Pentagon
auditors trying to “follow the money” and their computerized databases
were intentionally targeted by inside-the-building explosives on 9/11,
with a plane impact as the preplanned cover story.
Once it is realized that the real story at the Pentagon – as at the WTC
in New York City – is inside explosives, the possibility that specific offices,
functions or even individuals were targeted to be ‘taken out’ becomes very
real, whereas the cover story that a Boeing 757 hit the building immediately
leads to the assumption -- probably desired by the real perpetrators -- that
any specific deaths and destruction were random.
The Ft. Monmouth Army auditor and his two colleagues were also
eyewitnesses to multiple teams of bomb-sniffing dogs and their K-9 handlers
in camouflage uniform at the Pentagon metro station just outside the
building at approximately 7:30 am on Sept. 11. He said that canine bomb
squads had not been at the Pentagon metro stop before 9/11, or since, but
only that day. Since K-9 dog squads don’t search for airliners, but bombs,
some kind of an explosives attack was apparently anticipated. Ms. Gallop
said she also saw the bomb-sniffing K-9 teams that morning, from the top
of the Pentagon Metro stop looking down. (A possible explanation for
the dogs could be advance security for President Bush’s anticipated arrival
at the Pentagon heliport, then scheduled for later that afternoon at
approximately 12:30 p.m.)
As mentioned above, in addition to the Army administrative area,
the second most-destroyed area of the Pentagon on 9/11 was the Naval
Command Center (NCC). The Official Conspiracy Theory contained in
the 9/11 Commission Report and repeated by the mainstream media holds
that 44 Naval Command Center personnel were physically present in that
space on the morning of 9/11, and that 43 of the 44 died. The author,
however, was told a very different story by the top military officer in charge
of the Navy Anti-Terrorism Division in the NCC on the morning of 9/11,
Coast Guard Reserve Rear Adm. Jeffrey Hathaway.6A After the attack
on the U.S.S. Cole in Aden Harbor in Yemen, Hathaway was put in charge
of Navy anti-terrorism force protection and was temporarily assigned to
the NCC before the attacks. Upon the author telling Hathaway that the
reported sole survivor of the Naval Command Center on 9/11 was Navy
Lt. Kevin Shaeffer, Adm. Hathaway immediately responded that that
wasn’t the whole story, and that a secret 19-or-so-person intelligence cell
were in a hardened room at the NCC that morning and all also survived
the attack. Given that everyone officially present in the Naval Command
Center, except for Shaeffer, reportedly died – by far the greatest
acknowledged fatalities-per-capita of any section of the Pentagon – the
possibility again immediately presents itself that this secret intelligence
cell was intentionally targeted by the internal explosives. The author has
queried Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer -- author of the expose
book Operation Dark Heart censored by the Defense Intelligence Agency
(DIA), a key operative in the pre-9/11 Special Operations Command
(SOCOM) “Able Danger” intelligence analysis group that identified
two of the three ‘Al Qaeda’ cells allegedly responsible for the 9/11 attacks
including ‘ringleader’ Mohammed Atta over a year before 9/11 -- as to
whether this Naval Command Center intelligence cell potentially targeted
by the inside-the-building explosives was part of ‘Able Danger’ despite the
fact that the operation was reportedly shut down the Rumsfeld Pentagon
immediately after Bush and Cheney took control of the White House in Jan.
2001. He said that to his knowledge it was not. (Shaffer said he is no
known immediate relation to the Official Theory Naval Command Center
alleged sole survivor Lt. Kevin Shaeffer, who, following months of surgery
and physical therapy after sustaining 60% burns from the attacks was then
hired as the key staff member on the critical 9/11 Commission subgroup
“investigating” DoD’s (non)response which censored not only “Able
Danger” but the Pentagon’s inside-the-building explosions as well as
NORAD’s hijack-scenario counter-terrorism exercises being conducted on
the morning of 9/11.
The author also interviewed a Navy public affairs officer assigned
to the Naval Command Center before and on 9/11, Lt. Cmdr. David
Nunally. This officer was not in the building that morning, having been
temporarily assigned elsewhere, but was quickly called back after the attacks
and assigned to be the deputy public affairs officer at the underground
“back-up Pentagon” location in Pennsylvania near the Maryland border,
called Site R. Lt. Cmdr. Nunnally said that Deputy Secretary of Defense
Paul Wolfowitz and later Vice President Cheney were flown to the Site R
underground bunker as a result of Richard Clarke’s official declaration
of “Continuity of Government/Continuity of Operations” (COG/COOP)
on the morning of 9/11. This is confirmed in Clarke’s book, Against
All Enemies, which reports that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld chose
Wolfowitz to be the designated COG/COOP official at Site R in his stead.
Perhaps significantly, the ‘crash’ site of Flight 93 is not far from Site R
and Camp David, which early reports on the morning of 9/11, presumably
taken from official sources, said may have been the flight’s intended target
(the Official Theory claims the believed Flight 93 target was the Capitol
bldg.), whose surrounding airspace, like that around Washington, D.C.,
is a standing shoot down area. Additional information about Site R, on
and after 9/11, can be found in James Bamford’s book, A Pretext for War.
The author has interviewed the then Acting Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Special Operations on 9/11, Robert Andrews, the top civilian
official then in charge of special operations under Secretary of Defense
Rumsfeld and a former Green Beret whose office was on the second floor
of the south section of the Pentagon, adjacent to the west section. Perhaps
significantly, the pre-9/11 Al Qaeda-tracking and data-mining operation
‘Able Danger’ was under the Special Operations Command (SOCOM).
While drawing the path that he took that morning on a sketch of
the Pentagon for the author, Mr. Andrews revealed the following:
Immediately after the second World Trade Center attack of 9:03,
Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld left his office on the Potomac side of
the Pentagon and went (merely) across the hall on the same floor to his
Executive Support Center (ESC), which is set up for teleconferencing.
There, he joined the now-famous teleconference of top government
officials run by White House NSC counterterrorism ‘czar’ Richard Clarke
out of the White House Situation Room area media room. Clarke, in his
book Against All Enemies, confirms that Rumsfeld was among the first
officials on this teleconference shortly after the second WTC tower
was hit. Clarke’s account and Andrews’ confirmation of it are thus
completely at odds with the Official Theory and the 9/11 Commission
report, which claim that no one could “find” Secretary Rumsfeld until
approximately 10:30 a.m. when he walked into the National Military
Command Center (NMCC) in the Pentagon. The fact that Rumsfeld,
the military’s top civilian official, was on Clarke’s teleconference along
with the top official of the Federal Aviation Administration, FAA
Director Jane Garvey, also unmasks the total lie of the official story
that Air Force interceptors weren’t scrambled in time “because the
military and the FAA couldn’t talk each other” that morning. The
top-most officials of the Pentagon and the FAA were talking to one
another constantly and being recorded on Clarke’s teleconference from
as early as 9:15 a.m. This videotaped Clarke teleconference is thus
“The Butterfield Tape” of 9/11 which, not surprisingly, has never been
released to the public. [During the 1970s Watergate scandal, secretlymade
tapes of President Nixon’s Oval Office conversations revealed by
Alexander Butterfield were the “smoking guns” which forced Nixon
to resign or face certain impeachment by the House and trial in the
Senate.]
According to Andrews, immediately after he learned the second
WTC tower was hit just after 9:03 a.m. from watching television in his
office, he and his aide left and ran as fast as they could down to “the
Secretary of Defense’s West section Counterterrorism Center (CTC)”
arriving at approximately 9:10 a.m. While they were in the CTC, a
violent event caused the ceiling tiles to fall from the ceiling and smoke
to pour into the room. Andrews immediately looked at his watch, which
read approximately 9:35 a.m. but which was set fast to ensure timely
arrival at meetings, so the actual time was closer to 9:32. He and his aide
then immediately evacuated the CTC with the goal of joining Rumsfeld
in the Secretary of Defense’s Executive Support Center (ESC) across
the hall from Rumsfeld’s main office. He said that Rumsfeld was already
on Clarke’s White House teleconference when they arrived. En route
to Rumsfeld’s ESC, Andrews said that when he and his aide entered
the corridor on the inside ring of the West section, the A Ring, “We had
to walk over dead bodies” to get to the inner courtyard. This is two rings
further in towards the center than the purported Official Theory ‘exit’ hole
in the inside wall of the center C Ring allegedly made by the alleged
Official Theory Flight 77 penetration of the building.
Once in the inner courtyard, Andrews and his aide ran as fast as they
could to Rumsfeld’s Executive Support Center, where he joined Rumsfeld
as his special operations/counterterrorism adviser during Clarke’s White
House teleconference. Andrews also said that Secretary of Defense
Rumsfeld spoke with President Bush while in the ESC. Whether this was
via Clarke’s teleconference or by phone or other means was not stated.
The fact that Rumsfeld personally communicated with Bush on 9/11 while
Rumsfeld was in his Executive Support Center across from his Pentagon
office has been published on an official DoD website.9
High-Level Official Testimony to the 9:30-9:32 First Violent Event Time
In addition to the already legion evidence that Flight 77, a large
Boeing 757-200 passenger plane, did not hit the Pentagon -- i.e. the toosmall
hole in the west side of the Pentagon being not nearly large enough
for the width of the plane’s fuselage let alone wingspan; no visible damage
to the lawn where Flight 77 allegedly skidded before hitting the building
at the ground floor; plane part wreckage at the site not from a 757 but
from a much smaller aircraft; Pentagon requests to TV media on the
morning of 9/11 not to take up-close images of the building damage, etc. --
there is also official evidence for the “too-early-for-the-Official-Story”
circa 9:32 time of the first violent event.
The FAA [Federal Aviation Administration] Timeline document
“Executive Summary—Chronology of a Multiple Hijacking Crisis––
September 11, 2001” includes the following entry: “0932: ATC
[Air Traffic Control] AEA reports aircraft crashes into west side of
Pentagon.” 3 The earlier-than-official-time of 9:32 is the critical fact
here, and not the stated cause, which was taken from the official narrative
and not from any direct ATC eyewitness reports.
On August 27, 2002, then White House Counsel and subsequently
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales gave an audio-taped Secretary of the
Navy Guest Lecture at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey , Calif.,
a Department of Defense university, in which he explicitly and clearly states
that “The Pentagon was attacked at 9:32.” A tape of this segment of
Gonzales’ talk was played at the 9/11 Emergency Truth Convergence held
at American University in Washington , D.C. in July 2005, and is on the
public record.
Denmark ’s soon-to-be Foreign Minister Per Stig Moller was in a
building in Washington, D.C. on 9/11 from which he looked out, heard an
explosion and saw the smoke first rise from the Pentagon. He immediately
looked at his wrist watch, which read 9:32 a.m. He gave interviews to
Denmark media the next morning in which he stated that the Pentagon
had been attacked at 9:32.4
In the Air Force’s own account of the events of 9/11, Air War Over
America, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)
general who finally ordered interceptor jets scrambled on 9/11, although
too late, General Larry Arnold, revealed that he ordered one of his fighter
jets to fly down low over the Pentagon shortly after the attack there that
morning, and that the pilot reported back that there was no evidence that
a plane had hit the building. This fighter—not Flight 77—is almost certainly
the plane seen on the Dulles Airport Air Traffic Controller’s screen making
a steep, high-speed 270- to 330-degree descent before disappearing from
the radar. When a plane flies low enough to go undetected, usually at
or below 500 feet, it is said to be flying “under the radar.” The
Pilotsfor911Truth website and their Pandora’s Black Box video
documentary have determined from official data released by the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) that the true altitude/height of the
plane represented by the blip seen on the Dulles ATC screen was 476 feet --
way to high to have hit the Pentagon at all, let alone its ground floor, but,
significantly, just the right height range to been seen by controllers to
have just gone off radar so it could be said to have crashed into the building.
Military pilots—like the one sent by Gen. Arnold on 9/11 to report on the
Pentagon’s damage—are trained to fly just under approx. 500 feet above
ground in order to evade radar detection. In fact, when the Air Traffic
Controller responsible for the plane and her colleagues watched the
extremely difficult 330-degree maneuver (originally reported as a
270-degree maneuver, since updated) on her screen, they were certain
that the plane whose blip they were watching perform this extremely
difficult ‘Top Gun’ feat was in fact a military aircraft, and said so at
the time. And it almost certainly was.
Thus, the likely reason the Pentagon has refused to lower its official
“Flight 77 impact” time of 9:37:46 -- usually ‘rounded down’ to 9:37 in
mainstream media reports -- to the actual 9:30- to 9:32-range time of the
first explosions there -- is that they decided to pretend the blip represented
by Gen. Arnold’s surveillance fighter jet was “Flight 77,” despite the fact
that the 9:37:46 approach path is for a plane that flies north of the Citgo
station, not the south-of-the-station path where the Official Theory says
the light poles were struck by the plane. Also, the Official Story claims
that the alleged 9:37:46 impact was the only Pentagon attack that morning,
yet by the time Arnold’s surveillance jet arrived on the scene, at least the
first internal violent event had already happened as the pilot reported
damage to the building, so DoD cannot acknowledge the actual earlier
9:30-9:32 time without revealing an inside attack on the building prior to
the Official Theory’s alleged outside impact.
Even the famous Naudet brothers’ video of the first attack of 9/11,
on World Trade Center 1 in New York, shows, at 42:27 minutes into the
tape, that there were reports at 9:30 that the Pentagon had been hit.4A
There is even some evidence of internal explosions prior to 9:30 a.m.
Pentagon Police officer Roosevelt Roberts Jr. was watching the NYC attacks
on TV when he got a call from his sergeant telling him that the Pentagon had
gone to ThreatCon Delta; then, just as he hung up the phone, he experienced
a violent explosion “at 9:12 or 9:11” as if “it was almost timed for precision,”
after which dust fell from the ceiling of the east loading dock where he was
working and he heard people screaming.
Significantly, all of this also happened just after 9:30 a.m.
(from The Complete 9/11 Timeline at www.HistoryCommons):
* After an inexplicable delay during which they knew that both WTC towers
had been attacked, the Secret Service suddenly acted as if the 9/11 attacks
were serious and “real”, rushing President Bush out of the library at the
Florida school where they had allowed him to continue to read to children
as much as 10 minutes after being told by Andy Card that the second NYC
tower had been hit.
* Firefighters were suddenly ordered out of WTC 1 in New York City.
* The New York Stock Exchange was ordered closed.
* The takeover of Flight 93 reportedly began, with the stabbing of a
flight attendant and one of the alleged hijackers announcing that there
was a bomb on board, picked up by air traffic controllers.
But perhaps the most convincing evidence for the Sept. 11 attacks
being an inside job is that the actual attacks were mirrored by Air Force
hijack-scenario counterterrorism ‘exercises’ being conducted by NORAD’s
(an Air Force agency’s) North East Sector (NEADS) on the morning of
9/11 itself. The author’s original research and analysis first revealed the
NEADS hijack-scenario exercises that ‘went live’ on 9/11 as the modus
operandi for the planning, execution and cover-up of the attacks, credited
as ‘The Holy Grail’ of 9/11 research by author Michael Ruppert in his
early 9/11 expose book Crossing the Rubicon.
Critically, the author has recently interviewed White House NSC
counterterrorism ‘czar’ Richard Clarke, who confirmed that NORAD
was conducting hijack-scenario exercises in the N.E. Sector – where
all three NYC, Pentagon and Pennsylvania attacks took place – on the
morning of 9/11 to an audience of 75, published on an official DoD
web site.4B The key excerpt from that article:
“Regarding 9/11 itself, Clarke noted that part of the little known
history of that day was confusion by NORAD’s North East Sector, which
was about to conduct an exercise on a partial hijack scenario as the actual
hijackings began, as to whether the unfolding events were ‘real world’ or
part of the exercise – a confusion whose cause bears an eerie similarity to
the ‘arm reaching out of the computer’ danger Cyber War [Clarke’s latest
book] warns about. “Yes, this happened on 9/11, and it happened with
TWA Flight 800, when the Navy was doing a sea search exercise in the
very area where the plane went down. And though the White House clears
every major exercise, on Sept. 11th just last year, the Coast Guard ran
an exercise on the Potomac River right near where the President was at
the time. I’m a firm believer in exercises, and we have to make sure that
firewalls in the future are tight. I wouldn’t have been able to respond
the way we did on 9/11 if we hadn’t exercised it five times.”
Also, critically, the operational head of NORAD NEADS on 9/11,
Air Force Col. Bob Marr, an expert on “Red Team” verisimilitude --
making military exercises and wargames as realistic or “real world” as
possible -- has also now publicly acknowledged that his Air Force agency
was conducting a plane-hijack-scenario counterterrorism exercise on the
morning of 9/11.4C
It is impossible that the highest levels of the Bush-Cheney White
House “couldn’t imagine” using planes as weapons when its own military
was practicing how to defend against exactly such a hijack-scenario attack
on the morning of 9/11 itself. In particular, Clarke stressed that the White
House advance approves all major military exercises, of which those
planned for and conducted on 9/11 more than qualified, and the White
House official most likely to have given that pre-approval, National
Security Council Director Condolezza Rice, is the very person who
publicly insisted that the administration “couldn’t imagine” that very
scenario. Rice was and is also a close colleague of and co-authored
a book with the 9/11 Commission’s Executive Director Phillip Zelikow,
whose Report pushed the Official Lie of 9/11 and didn’t mention the
hijack-scenario NORAD “exercises” being conducted that very morning.
On February 4, 2004, the author interviewed Air Force General
Ralph Eberhart, Commander of NORAD on 9/11, about NORAD’s
hijack-scenario exercise on the morning of 9/11. To the author’s knowledge,
the top NORAD official has granted no other interview since the events
of September 11. Before being asked questions, Gen. Eberhart was given
copies of all mainstream press articles published as of that date on the
subject of the confusion on 9/11 of his Northeast Sector (NEADS) personnel
running NORAD’s “Vigilant Guardian/Vigilant Warrior” emergency
response exercises that morning. As of the date of the interview, therefore,
the then head of NORAD was made aware of the initial confusion by his
own NEADS “game” players on 9/11 between incoming exercise reports
and incoming reports of actual hijacks.
The author first asked Gen. Eberhart if there was any connection
between NORAD’s “Vigilant Guardian/Vigilant Warrior” exercise being
run on 9/11 and the plane-crashing-into-tower emergency response exercise
simultaneously being held at National Reconnaissance Office (NRO)
headquarters outside Washington, D.C.12/first cite He replied, “No.”
This response was surprising, as a large percentage of NRO personnel
are reportedly from his own agency, the Air Force. He was asked for
reconfirmation, to which he again said, “No.” Laying the ground for
the next question, the author mentioned that NEADS’ “exercise” director
on the morning of 9/11, Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins, has said that she was
confused as to whether initial reports of the hijacked planes on the morning
of 9/11 were “real world” or “part of the game.” This, the author noted,
showed that the NORAD exercises that morning had to have been on
a hijack scenario at least similar to the actual attacks, as otherwise there
wouldn’t have been any grounds for confusion. After considering this
for a moment, Gen. Eberhart refused to answer any further questions
and abruptly ended the interview. As we have seen above, subsequent
to the initial publication of this white paper in the first printing of
The Terror Conspiracy, NORAD officials confirmed that their ‘exercise’
on the morning of 9/11 did, indeed, include a hijack scenario (Touching
History, pp. 3-6 and 24-27).
Explosive Revelations Regarding the WTC Attacks
Millions in the U.S. and around the world now know World Trade
Center Towers 1 and 2 as well as WTC Building 7, not hit by any plane,
fell due to controlled demolitions using pre-planted super-military-grade
thermite explosives pre-planted inside the buildings, to which ‘Al Qaeda’
could never have obtained access – especially to WTC 7, which housed
multiple U.S. Government agencies including the CIA, FBI, Secret Service,
SEC and even NYC Mayor Giuliani’s own Emergency Operations Center
from which emergency counterterrorism responses were to have been run --
thanks to the impeccable and courageous efforts of Prof. David Ray Griffin
and Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (www.ae911truth.org), among
others. Over 1,300 licensed architects and engineers have signed Architects
& Engineers’ petition calling for a new, truly independent investigation of
the events leading up to and on 9/11.
Among the most explosive revelations of what really happened at
the World Trade Center on Sept. 11 is WTC 7 owner and WTC 1 and 2
lease-holder Larry Silverstein’s admission, in an interview on PBS
Television that the NYC “fire department commander,” after a discussion
in a phone call with Silverstein late on the afternoon of 9/11, made the
decision “to pull [the building, a professional term for triggering the
controlled demolition of a structure with preplaced explosives] and we
watched the building collapse.” This claim takes on sinister dimensions
when combined with the below inside information received from American
Helicopter Society Executive Director M.E. Rhett Flater, who knows many
of the principals involved:
“The NYC Police [Dept.] had two Bell 412’s [helicopters] equipped
with hoists and rescuers in the air on 9/11 next to the WTCs. One of these
was the same 412 and police crew which assisted with rooftop rescues when
one of the buildings was attacked by Al Qaeda bombers several years earlier
[in 1993]. The NYC Fire Department, which has no love for the NYC
Police Department, assumed jurisdiction and denied access to the roof by
the NYC Police helicopters. Complicating matters, the rooftop doors were
[double] locked prior to 9/11 at the direction of the NYC Fire Department.
As a result, there were no helicopter rescue attempts. When a fleet of
Sikorsky U-60L Black Hawks arrived from Stratford with medics and
supplies, they were ordered to a local airport and directed to stay away
from the towers. The same was true of other rescue attempts by civil and
military and paramilitary helicopters.” 9A
Amazingly, the pilot of one of the NYC Police Dept. helicopters
who sent two of his crew members down to the WTC 1 roof to rescue
survivors after the basement bombing of the building in 1993, Det. Greg
Semendinger, was the official NYPD photographer in one of its four
helicopters circling around the Towers on 9/11, and expressed ‘surprise’
that there was no one on the roof to rescue9B, though it was well known –
even infamous – throughout the Police Department that the NYC Fire
Department had ordered the roof doors double-locked. Further,
Semendinger’s helicopter that morning was equipped with the same winch
and foldable rescue seat he had used to rescue almost two dozen from the
WTC roof eight years earlier. Of the 2,770 photos Semendinger took from
the NYPD helicopter on 9/11, which were provided to the National Institute
of Standards and Technololgy (NIST) as background for their report that
refused to even consider the controlled demolition hypothesis for what
caused the Towers to fall and which NIST then provided to the 9/11
Commission, and which subsequently were given to ABC News as a result
of its FOIA demand, only 24 have been released to the public (see above
link). The remaining 2,746 photos almost certainly contain literal
‘smoking guns’ and need to be forced into the public domain by a new,
truly independent investigation of Sept. 11th.
Putting two and two together, the NYC Fire Dept. commander(s)
who ordered the WTC 1 and 2 rooftop doors double-locked -- closing off
the only hope of escape for victims caught above the point of the plane
impacts and fires, many of whom were forced to jump to their deaths –
also refused to allow NY Police Department helicopters equipped and
ready to rescue anyone able to get to the roofs – or any of the other dozens
of civilian, military and paramilitary helicopters that rushed to Manhattan
ready to rescue them – to do so; and, after talking with WTC 7 owner
Silverstein, ordered that that building be destroyed by classic remotecontrolled
demolition. And what’s ‘good’ for the goose (WTC 7) is ‘good’
for the gander (WTC 1 and 2): i.e., it is almost certain that Silverstein and
the NYC Fire Department Commander also made the decision to bring
down WTC 1 and 2 by controlled demolition earlier in the day.
This is a high evil forcing a “devil’s alternative” on the WTC victims
caught above the plane impacts and fires that would make Hitler’s SS shake
with rage.
To add fuel to the fire, Fox News reporter and former Gannett News
journalist Jeffrey Shapiro has claimed that NYC Police Department officials
told him late on the afternoon of 9/11 that Silverstein also was on the phone
with his insurance company trying to talk them into approving the controlled
demolition destruction of WTC 7, the one WTC structure he owned outright,
using language similar to that Silverstein told PBS he and the Fire Department
Commander had used as the pretext for ‘pulling’ the building
(http://www.prisonplanet.com/bombshell-silverstein-wanted-to-demolishbuilding-
7-on-911.html ).
Further, WTC janitor William “Willy” Rodriguez, the last nonemergency-
responder to leave the WTC alive on 9/11, has testified that he
was in the first basement level of the WTC when an immense explosion
went off below him in the even-deeper subbasement level(s) of the building
a few seconds before the plane hit the tower high above.10 Just as Robert
Andrews revealed that the West-side sub-level of the Pentagon was damaged
at approximately 9:32 a.m. on 9/11, and as we know that the cause of the
first 9:32 a.m. Pentagon attack was not an impact event but inside
explosives, there thus are eye- and ear witness reports of bombs going off
in both the Pentagon and the WTC underground level(s) before either were
hit by anything from the outside.
As no “outside” terrorist, al Qaeda or otherwise, could have had
access to either the Pentagon or the sustained advance access needed to preplace
explosives inside the WTC, only domestic insiders could have preplaced
the explosives in both the Pentagon and the WTC. Further, because
the WTC1 deep-basement explosions(s) experienced by Willy Rodriguez
happened before the tower was hit by a plane; as any incoming plane not
controlled by the same agents that triggered the sub-basement detonation(s)
could have veered off from the building at the last second thereby ruining
the plane-impact-as-cover-story for the later building collapse; and as the
sub-basement explosions were necessary for the actual later collapse of the
buildings by controlled demolition, the same domestic U.S. insiders had
to have controlled both the internal sub-basement detonations and the
incoming plane(s). Thus, even if al Qaeda hijackers were on the incoming
planes, they were not in control of the final approach and impact of the
planes, which had to have been 100 percent guaranteed and thus 100 percent
controlled by domestic U.S. insiders to ensure that, once the WTC1 subbasement
explosions went off, the plane could not veer off and miss the
building ruining the plane-impact-and-fires cover story for its collapse.
This fact is crucial, as it can take jurisdiction for the mass murders at the
WTC out of the hands from the FBI, which oversees crimes committed
in the air, as a compelling legal argument can be made that the real crime
of controlling the planes’ impacts into the towers was committed by ground
controllers in a terrestrial building or vehicle. In fact, it has been reported
that just-former FBI top ‘Al Qaeda’ hunter John O’Neill, who began his
new job as head of security for the WTC on 9/11, told his assistant in his
last phone call from the towers that the planes were being controlled “from
the ground.” If so, this places the jurisdiction of the crime of the WTC
mass murders squarely with the State of New York, as murder is a State
crime and multiple mass murders are the sum of individual State crimes.
And because the controllers of the timing of the WTC 1 basement-level
explosives had to have also been the controllers of the final approach and
impact of the planes, and the former was arguably, and provably with
legal discovery and subpoena power, on the ground and not in the air,
a Manhattan Grand Jury can be given the case and pull the jurisdiction
for the Bush-Cheney Reichstag Fire out of Federal jurisdiction.
Because the real modus operandi of both the Pentagon and WTC
attacks are the same -- inside explosions with plane-impacts-and-fire
cover stories -- it is logical to deduce that the same insider terrorists
were responsible for pre-placing and detonating the explosives inside
both the WTC and the Pentagon. That is, a single group of domestic
conspirators—not al Qaeda or any other outside terrorists—almost
certainly planned and executed both the WTC and Pentagon attacks,
which significantly narrows the range for the identities of the real
perpetrators.
In addition to the already well known and officially acknowledged
evidence of Bush Administration foreknowledge of the broad outlines
of the September 11 attacks – i.e. advance warnings from intelligence
agencies of as many as 11 foreign countries and the content of the
now-famous August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief (whose 10-page
attachment still has not been made public), etc. -- there is strong
evidence that Bush-Cheney administration insiders had near perfect --
if not complete -- advance knowledge of the planned attacks and both
mirrored them by controlling the actual attacks under cover of the
9/11 hijack-scneario ‘exercises’ and chose the date for the actual attacks,
which was therefore also the date for the exercises.
(Note: The fact that Bush Admin. insiders had advance knowledge of the
details of a planned “outside” attack, as detailed below, is not inconsistent
with these insiders having facilitated and even orchestrated the actual
attacks to both ensure they happened ‘successfully’ and to blame them
on the planners. That is, the real plot behind the Sept. 11 attacks is similar
to that of the Nazi Reichstag Fire, through which Hitler rapidly consolidated
power, which was its purpose. Like the Nazi-facilitated Reichstag fire,
the above and below evidence makes it highly likely that the true story
of Sept. 11 is that there was a real though highly-unlikely-to-succeed
“outside” plot about which U.S. and allied intelligence gained detailed
advance knowledge and the Administration then secretly protected and
enabled the plot to ensure not only that it succeeded, but succeeded
spectacularly as the psychological operation needed to justify the entire
subsequent Bush-Cheney global-military and domestic-surveillance
agenda.
Below is just some of the compelling evidence that the Bush-
Cheney Administration had detailed advance knowledge of the attack plans:
1) Shortly after September 11, Newsweek reported that before
9/11, the Bush Administration initiated a Foreign Intelligence
Surveillance Act (FISA) Court surveillance/tap of “up to 20” suspected al
Qaeda-linked terrorists then in the U.S., but that then FISA Court Chief
Justice Royce Lamberth subsequently ordered the then-already-ongoing
surveillance stopped. This can only mean one thing -- that the Bush
Justice Dept./FBI/NSA initiated the tap before asking the FISA Court for
a warrant for it, as with the now-famous post-9/11 NSA taps initiated by
the Bush administration without first applying for FISA warrants.
As “up to 20” is a clever way of saying “19” without making the
link to 9/11 explicit, the Bush Administration Justice Dept/FBI/NSA
almost certainly initiated surveillance of all 19, or close to all 19, of the
soon-to-be alleged 9/11 hijackers before 9/11, and probably did so based
at least in part on the findings of Special Operations Command’s “Able
Danger” data mining intelligence operation which Bush and Rumsfeld
ordered shut down just after taking office in late Jan. 2001. Though Judge
Lamberth ordered the surveillance ended once the administration filed the
formal warrant application, there is evidence that the Bush administration
ignored his order to cease the tap and continued its surveillance of the
alleged 9/11 hijackers up to and including the day of 9/11:
Zacarias Moussaoui—the only person indicted by the Bush
Administration for anything even related to 9/11—has stated in court
filings that both he “and my (al Qaeda) brothers” then in the U.S. were
surveilled by the Bush administration before 9/11 and that the Bush
Administration knew he could prove it. How could this be the case?
If Moussaoui was one of the “up to 20” al Qaeda-linked terrorist suspects
the U.S. surveilled before 9/11 without an advance FISA warrant, as
reported by Newsweek, then Moussaoui was also one of the “up to 20”
whose warrantless surveillance Judge Lamberth ordered stopped.
Moussaoui, after all, was originally named as the “20th hijacker” of
the 9/11 plot. Amazingly, the FISA Act requires that, if the FISA Court
rejects a surveillance that was initiated before a warrant has been
applied for, as in this case, the court must inform “the target(s)” of
the surveillance and give him/them the government’s stated reason for
initiating the tap in the FISA application. Thus Moussaoui can “prove”
the Bush Administration/FBI initiated surveillance on him before 9/11
because, it can thus be deduced, the FISA Court itself -- or some U.S.
agency it ordered to do so on its behalf -- told him so after Lamberth
ordered his surveillance and that of the other “up to 20” plotters stopped.
Those other “19 or so” plotters who were required by law to have also
been officially informed before the attacks that they had been surveilled
and for what stated reason would have also included Mohammad Atta,
Ramzi Binalshibh and all of the other official story hijackers. And
because it was almost certainly the FBIthat surveilled the “19 or 20”
inside the U.S. without warrants before the attacks, explains why the FBI
was able to so quickly identify the 19 official-story hijackers immediately
after the attacks, though it falsely claimed they knew nothing about the
hijackers ahead of time and that the attacks were a complete surprise.
Given the above, the fact that the FISA Court was required to
inform most or all 19 of the “up to 20” alleged 9/11 hijackers before 9/11
that they were being surveilled by the Bush Administration—and the
reason for such surveillance -- throws new light on the claims by the
Pentagon’s then-secret data mining task force“Able Danger” to have
tracked lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta and at least four of the other
19 hijackers beginning in January 2000, when Atta actually did enter the
country according to Daniel Hopsicker’s taped interview with Atta’s
live-in girlfriend Amanda Keller reported in his book Welcome to
Terrorland. The FBI falsely claimed, and still falsely claims, that Atta
did not enter the U.S. until the summer of 2000, six months after he
actually did so. The likely reason for this intentional lie about when
Atta first entered the country is what Atta is known to have done while
inside the U.S. between January and the Summer of 2000. Hopsicker
reveals that, among other activities, Atta visited Portland, Maine, in
March, 2000, and perhaps even earlier. An abiding “mystery” of the
official 9/11 cover story is why Atta drove to this very city -- Portlanf,
Maine -- on September 10, the day before 9/11, and then flew from
Portland to Boston early on the morning of September 11. The answer
to this “mystery,” which the FBIclearly already knows, is the link
between what Atta was doing in Portland before the Bush Administration
said he was even in the country, as well as what he was doing there the
day before 9/11 and early on the morning of 9/11. This probably has
something to do with the fact that the CIA reportedly runs secret flights
out of an airport in Portland , Maine , and that “rendition” detainees
have said they were flown out of the country on special jets after first
stopping at Portland ’s International Jet Port.12
2) The FBI’s top bin Laden/al Qaeda hunter until shortly before
9/11, John O’Neill, “happened” to be at the same hotel in the same town
near Tarragona , Spain in mid-July 2001 just before lead hijacker
Mohammed Atta and 9/11 plot “coordinator” Ramzi Binalshibh arrived
there. Some Bush administration officials now also believe that 9/11
“mastermind” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) met there for what the
9/11 Commission calls “the Final 9/11 Planning Meeting.” This cannot
be—and is not—a coincidence. O’Neill, who was in close contact with
German intelligence -- Atta led the “German cell” for the 9/11 attacks --
and Spanish intelligence, clearly had been alerted to the upcoming
“Final Planning Meeting” meeting and was at the hotel to surveil/tap/bug
the room and/or monitor the surveillance/taps/bugs of German and/or
Spanish intelligence where it was about to be held. O’Neill and his
agency, the Bush-Cheney Administration’s FBI, thus knew every detail --
or nearly every detail, see below -- of the planned 9/11 plot at least
two months in advance of the attacks.
Perhaps just as significantly, European media reported that bin
Laden was in an American hospital in Dubai incapacitated for surgery
during precisely this same mid-July 2001 period of the Spanish ”Final
9/11 Planning Meeting.” Reportedly, bin Laden was visited in the
hospital by the CIA’s then UAE station chief. The question naturally
arises whether bin Laden was telephoned by Atta, Binalshibh and
perhaps even also KSM, or visa versa, while the latter were at the
“Final 9/11 Planning Meeting” in the hotel that O’Neill had pre-bugged.
If so, then O’Neill, the FBI, and the highest levels of the Bush Admin. –
including O’Neill’s then boss Attorney General Ashcroft, who suddenly
stopped flying commercial aircraft about this time -- knew not only
every detail of the 9/11 plot as of that date, but almost certainly
recorded all the key conspirators plotting their “final plans” including
possibly bin Laden himself, on tape—clearly another “Butterfield” tape
to be demanded by subpoena in a new 9/11 investigation. In fact, former
FBI translator and 9/11 whistleblower Sibel Edmonds has revealed,
based on documents she saw as part of her official duties, that bin Laden
himself was working for the U.S. up to and on the day of 9/11 itself.
This almost certainly is the reason the FBI has never listed bin Laden as
wanted for 9/11 on its “Most Wanted Terrorists” web page, and why
the FBI’s chief investigative spokesman Rex Tomb has said the reason
bin Laden is not officially wanted for 9/11 is because there is no real
evidence linking him to the attacks.
That is, there may be, and probably is, evidence linking bin
Laden,Binalshibh, KSM and Al Qaeda to a 9/11-like plot and planning,
but not to the actual attacks, as they were physically carried out by
insiders under cover of U.S. Air Force counterterrorism “exercises” that
mirrored the “final plans” discussed at the July 2001Tarragona meeting.
As noted above, on 9/11 itself the U.S. military was conducting
NORAD emergency response exercises on scenarios involving plane
hijacks, and the NRO was conducting an emergency response exercise
on the scenario of a plane crashing into one of the towers of is
headquarters just outside Washington, D.C.11 where many NRO
personnel are from the Air Force and CIA. It is next to impossible for
this to have been the case unless the exercises were intentionally
scripted to mirror what had been learned from the above-mentioned
detailed advance intelligence. That is, the “cover-story” purpose of the
military exercises held on 9/11 was to practice how to defend against
the very attacks that John O’Neill’s Tarragona meeting surveillance, the
Pentagon’s “Able Danger” data-mining operation and the FBI’s preattack
FISA-warrant-less surveillance of the “up to 20” (19)
suspected al Qaeda terrorists had already revealed. You don’t practice
defending against something in multi-million-dollar hijack-scenario
exercises on the morning of 9/11 that you “can’t imagine.”
A few paragraphs above it was stated that, because of O’Neill’s
surveillance of the Al Qaeda mastermind’s and lead hijacker’s “Final
Planning Meeting” in Tarragona, Spain, he and the Bush-Cheney FBI
knew nearly every significant operational detail of the plot. The one
“burning” exception to this, however, is the date of the 9/11 attacks.
Perhaps the most compelling proof of active Bush administration
complicity in 9/11is that lead hijacker Mohamed Atta took the
information to this critical mid-July “Final 9/11 Planning Meeting” that
“the date [for the attacks] has been set” -- i.e. set by someone else other
than Atta) -- and that he, Atta, didn’t yet know it, but would “know it”
in five to six weeks, by late August 2001.13 Atta was clearly waiting
to learn the date of what the Bush Administration and 9/11 Commission
allege was “his own” attack. This last key piece of the puzzle fell into
place during the first phase of Zacarias Moussaoui’s sentencing trial,
in the 58-page transcript of “9/11 mastermind” Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed’s interrogation “testimony” read into the trial record by
the Bush Department of Justice prosecution. In this transcript, KSM
says that he and bin Laden “allowed Atta to choose” both the final
targets and the attack date.”14 However, from what Atta said to
Binalshibh and probably also to KSM and possibly even also to
bin Laden by phone at the “Final Planning Meeting” in Spain, we know
that Atta did not set the attack date, as he was waiting to learn it five
to six weeks after that mid-July “Final Planning Meeting.” Putting
two and two together from the above, therefore, we know that
neither bin Laden nor alleged “mastermind” KSM nor alleged
“coordinator” Binalshibh set the date for “their own” attacks, though
setting the date of an attack is the one thing that translates a mere plan –
a plot or conspiracy -- into reality. That is, none of the top alleged
“outside’ conspirators set the date for the September 11 attacks.
If the “9/11 conspirators” didn’t set the date to turn their plot
into a reality, then who did?
The key and central fact of the entire 9/11 plot is that the attack
date Atta was “waiting for” was the date of the Bush Administration’s
planned counterterrorism exercises, which, in a vicious circle, were
scripted to mirror Atta’s and Binalshibh’s attack plan gleaned via
advance intelligence obtained from O’Neill’s surveillance of the
“Final 9/11 Planning Meeting” near Tarragona, from the Pentagon’s
“Able Danger” tracking of Atta and other of the 19 hijack-plotters,
and the FBI’s warrantless surveillance of Atta and other of the aboutto-
be alleged hijackers. And because Atta was “waiting to hear” the
attack date, which was the hijack-scenario U.S. military exercise
date, Atta was the sole plotter to whom the Bush Administration
finally chose to tell the actual attack date – Sept.11th -- as soon as
it was selected, and he bought his one-way ticket as soon as he learned
it, in late August 2001, just as he had predicted at the “Final Planning
Meeting.”
The No. 1 inside conspirator, therefore, is whoever gave the
Pentagon’s own hijack-scenario counterterrorism exercise details
and their date -- Sept. 11 -- to Mohamed Atta or to a middleman who,
in turn, gave the date to Atta.
Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed, then head of Pakistan’s military
intelligence agency ISI, is the prime suspect for a second-level
middleman who laundered this No. 1 inside-conspirator’s NORAD
hijack-scenario exercise date to Atta. On the morning of 9/11,
Ahmed was in Washington, D.C. having breakfast with future CIA
Director Porter Goss and Senator Bob Graham, soon to co-chair of
the joint House-Senate “investigation” of the 9/11 attacks, and had
met with CIA Director George Tenet and with top officials at the
Pentagon, about to conduct the exercises, in the few days leading
up to 9/11. He is therefore the most likely person who was told
the date and details of the Pentagon’s hijack-scenario emergency
response exercises and communicated them, directly or via an
intermediary, to Atta, as Ahmed also approved wiring $100,000
to Atta shortly before 9/11. (Interestingly, it has been reported that
$100,000 is an amount the FBI often pays to key informants). It is
also known that Atta then confirmed 9/11 as the date for the exercises—
which was to be the date for the attacks—in his now-famous NSAintercepted
call with KSM of September 10, 2001, in which he related
“The Match is about to begin. Zero hour is tomorrow.” “Match” is
a way of saying “exercise” or “game.” This critical September 10th
telephone intercept was almost certainly made without an advance
FISA warrant, putting the lie to then NSA Director and later CIA
Director Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden’s patently false claim that
the “first” warrantless taps were initiated only as a defensive response
to 9/11 following the attacks.
Another abiding “mystery” of September 11 is why Gen. Eberhart,
the commander of NORAD on 9/11, claimed to the 9/11 Commission
that on the morning of 9/11 NORAD was conducting, among others,
a preplanned “Soviet-era” emergency response exercise15 in which U.S.
fighter jets were to defend against “Russian” nuclear bombers played by
U.S. military “Red Team” planes. Why “Soviet era” when the Soviet
Union had ceased to exist ten years before? He didn’t say “Russian,”
he said “Soviet.” This is very strange until one discovers that, despite
repeated official and media claims that Sept. 11 was “completely unique”
and that the skies over America had “never before” been cleared of all
commercial and private/civilian aircraft, NORAD (the Air Force) had
conducted a previous emergency response exercise 40 years earlier
which also completely cleared the skies over the mainland U.S.
This was on October 14, 1961, in a war game called “Sky Shield II,”
which was based on a scenario of defending against an air attack by
Soviet bombers on New York City.16 The main difference between the
1961 exercise and September 11th is that the clearing of the skies was
publicly announced in advance in “Sky Shield.” This actual Soviet-era
exercise (and the fact that it was labeled II implies there was yet an earlier
one), which included 1,800 U.S. and 15 Canadian military planes and was
billed as “the greatest exercise ever conducted by Western air defense
forces,” is even mentioned in the Air Force’s own account of the events
of Sept. 11, Air War Over America. In fact, Gen. Larry Arnold, NORAD’s
commander for the continental U.S. on 9/11 directly under Eberhart, who
finally ordered interceptor jets scrambled to belatedly meet the hijack threat,
made a point of including the eerily similar 1961 Air Force war game
in the book. Not only did both the 1961 and September 11 NORAD
“Soviet-era” wargame scenarios include attacks on New York City; in
the 1961 exercise, U.S. military planes played the role of the Soviet attack
bombers. That is, the U.S.military pre-scripted both the defense and the
“attack”by its own planes pretending to be Soviet aircraft. If Eberhart’s
testimony to the 9/11 Commission about NORAD’s conducting a “Sovietera”
attack scenario exercise on 9/11 to the Commission is correct, his
own Air Force agency was conducting an exercise much like the one
in 1961 on 9/11, for which NORAD therefore pre-scripted the 9/11 “attack”
scenario, which was “made real” in the actual attacks that morning.
If a high-level cabal inside the U.S. military and intelligence
community intended to make the 9/11 hijack-scenario “exercise(s)” based
on Atta’s “Final Planning Meeting” plot become real that morning, they
had to have a plan for ensuring the planes actually made it to their targets.
Taking control of the original flight(s) and substituting military planes made
to look like them would be the “safest” way to achieve this. In this light,
it is significant that mainstream press stories contain intriguing reports
pointing to the possibility that there were two American Airlines “Flight
11s,” leaving from two different gates at Boston Logan airport within
a few minutes of one another on 9/11, as well as emerging evidence of
other of the Official-Theory-hijacked 9/11 flight numbers being “twinned,”17
or duplicated. The question thus naturally arises, were these “twin” planes
U.S. military or CIA planes “playing” hijacked-airliner “attackers,” similar
to the 1961 “Sky Shield” scenario except substituting commandeered
airliners for Soviet bombers? And could the planned 9/11 NORAD
exercises have included a “trigger” event to clear the skies over the mainland
U.S. so that a realistic test of U.S. air defenses could be conducted without
interference from the thousands of civilian aircraft normally in the air?
Key quotes from New York Times articles before, during and
immediately after the 1961 NORAD “Sky Shield” exercise are eerily
similar to stories appearing on 9/11 [text in parentheses and italics added]:
“It is not so much the fear of collisions with military aircraft that has caused
civilian planes to be ordered out of the skies, as it is the knowledge that
inadequate [civilian FAA] electronic flight controls will be available during
the exercise to guide them. [U.S.] Strategic Air Command (SAC) bombers,
playing the role of the marauding forces, will seek to foul communications
and radar. They will drop tinsel-like pieces of metal called “chaff” overhead
[similar to the myriad small pieces of metal scrap found on the Pentagon
lawn and at the Shanksville, Pennsylvania “crash” site on 9/11?]…that will
throw radarscopes [including the FAA’s] into a confusion of false signals.”
“All the [exercise “Red Team”] bomber missions were laid out ahead of
time and fed into the NORAD computer.” “An automated shorthand
running display of the entire battle was provided at NORAD combat center
and in similar centers at Strategic Air Command headquarters [to which
President Bush was taken on 9/11] and in the Pentagon [which was attacked
on 9/11].” “A fight plan for every [exercise] aircraft is fed into the
computer’s memory beforehand. When a plane shows on the radarscope,
a console operator picks up an aluminum electronic gun, points it at the blip,
and squeezes the trigger. That brings the flight to the computer’s attention.
If the flight [plan] is filed in its memory, the computer automatically replies,
‘Yes, I am aware of that [plane].’ It does this by marking the flight with
an F for Friendly. While the computer compares the flight with its
memorized data, it marks the flight P for Pending. Finally, it may mark it
H for Hostile. ‘We have two minutes to identify a flight [as Friendly] before
we scramble [interceptor jets]…to make a visual identification of an
uncertain aircraft or to attack it.’” ‘We do not train [in exercises like the
1961 ‘Sky Shield II, or on 9/11] with Hostile symbology [showing on
screens]; therefore, the Strategic Air Command’s bombers playing the role
of the attacking [Soviet-Russian] force [on October 14, 1961] were marked
K, for Faker.’” “There are seventeen units of Army Air Defense Artillery
with ground-to-air anti-aircraft missiles near New York [in 1961; how many
more were there on 9/11, 40 years later, when none, according to the official
story, were used?]”
The 1961 wargame was directed by then NORAD commander
Air Force Gen. Laurence Sherman Kuter from his combat operations center
at NORAD’s Colorado Springs headquarters, which in the mid-1960s moved
to Cheyenne Mountain, also Gen. Eberhart’s command center on 9/11.
It may also be significant that the Air Force’s war games simulation center
is at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama, which Gen. Kuter had earlier
commanded and where lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta had received
training prior to 9/11.
The Pentagon’s “Able Danger” data miners claim that “Department
of Defense lawyers” -- almost certainly from the National Security Agency,
then headed by Gen. Hayden, an officer in the Air Force, the same service
that planned the 9/11 war games -- blocked planned meetings with the FBI
at which they wanted to tell the FBI that they had “tracked” Atta and other
of the 9/11 hijackers prior to 9/11 and ask the FBI to initiate additional
surveillance on them. The fact that the FBI did initiate exactly such a
surveillance of the “up to 20 Al Qaeda linked terrorist suspects” before
9/11 (see above) is strong evidence that, despite its claims to the contrary,
the Pentagon’s “Able Danger” team, or someone who knew what they
had found, did communicate what they had learned from tracking Atta and
the others to the FBI before 9/11, and that the FBI then initiated FISAwarrant-
less surveillances of Atta and others subsequently ordered stopped
by then Chief FISA Court Judge Lamberth -- all prior to 9/11. The fact that
initially-suspected “20th 9/11 hijacker” Moussaoui officially filed claims
that he “and my brothers” were surveilled before 9/11 is further evidence
that the FBI continued to watch all or most of the 9/11 hijackers right up
until the attacks, despite Lamberth’s order to cease and desist. In the days
leading up to 9/11, FBI Headquarters supervisors David Frasca and his
deputy Michael Maltbie refused 70 urgent requests by Moussaoui’s
FBI interrogator for either a FISA Court warrant or an “ordinary” criminal
warrant to get into Moussaoui’s computer and surveil anyone mentioned
therein. Doing so, it is claimed, would have stopped the plot, as Moussaoui
now claims to have personally known 17 -- almost all -- of the alleged
19 hijackers.18
In addition to all the evidence that plane-impacts-and-fire was the
carefully planned cover story for the cause of collapse of WTC 1, 2
and 7, as well as the west façade of the Pentagon, both of which were
initially hit by inside-the-buildings explosives, not planes, the other
overwhelming line of evidence for 9/11 being an “Inside Job” is the
anthrax attacks. A summary of the anthrax links to 9/11 itself –
not just to the known mid-October 2001 letters – follows.
For full details on these links, see The Scarlet A: The Anthrax Links
to 9/11 by the author.
Any evidence linking 9/11 to the anthrax letters -- dated September 11
but sent in mid-October and only to Democratic leaders in Congress, no
Republicans -- is direct evidence of an inside job because that particular type
of anthrax is known to have been of the highly controlled “Ames strain”
developed by the U.S. Army at Ft. Detrick, Maryland, and at the University
of Iowa in Ames, Iowa. It was also high-spore-count, super military-grade
weaponized anthrax refined according to a trade secret reportedly personally
held by William Patrick, former Ft. Detrick bio-weapons expert and mentor
of Steven Hatfill, the only “person of interest” stalked by the FBI as a
suspect in the still “unsolved” anthrax case, and the close friend and
colleague of Bush Administration bio-counterterrorism expert Jerry Hauer,
a signer of the pre-9/11 Project for New American Century (PNAC)
manifesto noting the “opportunities” that would be created by “a new
Pearl Harbor” attack.
On September 11, 2001 this same Jerry Hauer reportedly personally
delivered the anti-anthrax medication Cipro to Vice President Cheney’s staff
at the White House. Why? The conservative legal watchdog group Judicial
Watch has filed a suit against Vice President Cheney and other Bush Admin.
officials demanding to know why Cipro was delivered to the executive
mansion -- and only to the executive mansion -- on the day of the attacks.
So far the response has been deafening silence. On September 10th, the day
before 9/11, FEMA and other emergency response personnel arrived in
New York City for a counter-bioterrorism exercise called “Tripod II”
claimed by the Bush administration to have been scheduled to begin
September 12. There is reason to believe that the bio-agent this drill was to
practice defending against was anthrax, as Jerry Hauer was also a major
planner of the New York City exercise. And there is also a strong possibility
the true start date for the exercise was Sept. 11, not Sept. 12, as many
“exercise” personnel were already in place in New York City on September
10. As NORAD’s (U.S. Air Force’s) hijack-scenario ‘counterterrorism’
exercise had just “come to life” in real attacks on 9/11, were Hauer and
Cheney worried that the same thing might be about to happen with the
counter-bioterrorism “exercise” Tripod II? Is this why the anti-anthrax
drug Cipro was distributed to the White House on 9/11 -- “just in case”?
If so, it would be strong evidence that Tripod II was on the scenario of
defending New York City -- and perhaps also the White House --
against an anthrax attack. Was the “vector” -- the delivery vehicle --
for that anthrax-attack-scenario emergency response exercise to have
been via hijacked plane(s)?
Notably, in their book on bio-terrorism, Germs, Judith Miller and
William Broad claim, apparently from inside sources, that Ramzi Yousef’s
plans for the first World Trade Center attack in 1993 included explosively
pushing large quantities of cyanide out into New York City. Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed, the official story “mastermind” of 9/11, is Yousef’s uncle.
Finally, former New York City mayor Rudolf Giuliani testified to the
9/11 Commission that even before WTC7, the location of his emergency
operations center, collapsed on 9/11, he moved those operations to the
command and control center set up for the “Tripod II” bio-terrorism exercise
on Pier 92 and that it worked even better than the original. Giuliani told the
9/11 Commission, “The reason Pier 92 was selected as a command
center was because on the next day, on September 12, Pier 92 was going
to have a drill. It had hundreds of people there -- from FEMA, from the
Federal Government, from [the] State [Dept.], from the [ New York ]
State Emergency Management Office – and they were getting ready for
a drill for bio-chemical attack. So that was going be the place they were
going to have the drill. The equipment was already there, so we were able
to establish a command center there that was two and a half to three times
bigger than the command center that we had lost at 7 World Trade Center.
And it was from there that the rest of the [9/11 and subsequent] search and
rescue effort was completed.”
Conclusion
A cabal of covert elements within the U.S. military and intelligence
community, not al Qaeda, had the classification-controlled access to plant
explosives inside its own most heavily defended world headquarters, the
Pentagon. The U.S. military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda,
had the access to plant the explosives Willy Rodriguez heard and felt go
off deep in the sub-basement of the World Trade Center on 9/11. The
U.S. military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, had offices in
WTC 7 and had the sustained access in the lead up to 9/11 to plant the
controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1,
WTC2 and WTC7 in New York City which brought down all three buildings
on 9/11. The U.S. military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, had
access to the sulfur-enhanced super-military-grade nano-thermite (thermate)
detected in the WTC dust needed to melt the steel found molten deep in
its basement levels as long as two months later, and to the super-militarygrade
nano anthrax spores in the letters sent to just the Democratic
leadership of the Congress -- no Republicans -- and to top media. Al Qaeda
would never target only Democrats, especially as the U.S. leadership at the
time of the 9/11 attacks was Republican. When he received the anthrax letter
dated Sept.11, then Senate Democratic leader Thomas Daschle was calling
for a Congressional investigation of 9/11 and had already been warned off
from “looking too closely at” 9/11 by personal calls from both President
Bush and Vice President Cheney. When he received his anthrax letter,
another Democratic leader, Senator Patrick Leahy, was leading Congress’
resistance to the Patriot Act, a premeditated assault on Americans’ privacy
rights and civil liberties justified by “al Qaeda’s” alleged 9/11 attack
clearly drafted by the Bush Administration well before 9/11 and “in the can”
awaiting its desired “New Pearl Harbor” trigger event. The U.S. military
and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, would have chosen the leastpopulated
and most-reinforced section of the Pentagon––its newly upgraded
west wedge—to strike in order to minimize casualties while being able to
blame outside attackers, whereas real terrorists would have done everything
they could to maximize them. Real terrorists, also, would have maximized
casualties at the World Trade Center by placing explosives so as to allow
the buildings to haphazardly fall on other buildings and the surrounding
streets, not bring them neatly down by controlled demolition designed
to minimize casualties and collateral damage. A U.S. military plane,
not one piloted by al Qaeda, had to have performed the steep ‘Top Gun’
high-speed 270- to 330-degree dive towards the Pentagon that Dulles
Air Traffic Controllers thought was a military plane as they watched it
on their screens that morning. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian airliner
flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the “Friendly” signal needed not
to trigger the Pentagon’s anti-aircraft missile batteries as it approached
the building. Only the U.S. military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break
its own Standard Operating Procedures and paralyze its own emergency
response system on 9/11.
And who in the U.S. military, intelligence and military contractor
chains of command and U.S. civilian leadership in the Bush-Cheney
Administration are among the prime suspects for these Acts of High
Treason?
First and foremost are the signatories of the pre-9/11 Project for
a New American Century (PNAC) manifesto calling for “a new Pearl
Harbor” to catalyze its radical right-wing global domination and domestic
surveillance-and-control agenda: 1) Vice President Dick Cheney;
2) Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld; 3) then Deputy Secretary of
Defense Paul Wolfowitz; 4) Richard Perle, then head of Secretary
Rumsfeld’s Defense Policy Board; 5) Jerry Hauer, one of the U.S.
government’s top bio-terrorism experts who reportedly took anti-anthrax
Cipro to the White House on 9/11.15A Hauer had been director of NYC
Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM),
whose personnel were moved to a New York pier on 9/11 just before its
WTC7 offices were destroyed by pre-placed controlled demolition charges.
A central player in scripting the bio-chem terrorism attack scenario for the
Sept. 10/11/12 TRIPOD II exercise in NYC, Hauer is also an expert in
the response to building collapses (New York Times, July 27, 1999).
It was Hauer who insisted, despite the 1993 terrorist attack on WTC1,
that Giuliani still locate his Office of Emergency Management, from which
a response to another terrorist attack would be expected to be orchestrated,
in WTC7 next door15B, and also Hauer who zealously pushed the ‘bin Laden
did it and planes-and-fires brought down the Towers’ official story on CBS
News on 9/11 in the immediate aftermath of the attacks before anyone
without insider knowledge could have possibly determined the actual cause
of the collapses, taking pains to state that explosives were not involved,
when they were. The OEM opened on the 23rd floor of WTC7 in June 1999,
where Hauer, its director, had his office. Hauer was also managing director
of Kroll Associates before and on 9/11, the company that provided ‘security’
for the World Trade Center, including all three buildings brought down by
controlled demolition that morning, and thus had complete access to preplace
the explosive charges he adamantly insisted on national TV on 9/11
were not involved. Hauer became a National Security adviser to the
National Institutes of Health on Sept. 10, the very day TRIPOD II personnel
arrived in New York City , from which new NIH post he managed the Bush
Administration’s ‘response’ to the imminent anthrax attacks and the
initial cover up of the insider anthrax killers. 6) Gary Bauer, the rightwing
‘family values’ zealot who ‘happened’ to be one of the ‘witnesses’
to immediately claim publicly to have seen ‘Flight 77 hit the Pentagon’,
proven by the evidence to be a physical impossibility; and 7) then National
Security Council Middle East adviser Zalmay Khalizad close to NSC
Director Condolezza Rice, soon to be the first US Ambassador to
Afghanistan after 9/11 and then U.S. Ambassador to Iraq – the very
two countries whose invasions were rationalized as retaliation for the 9/11
attacks. During the Cold War, Khalizad was reportedly a liaison to then
CIA “bag man” Osama bin Laden in the CIA-Pakistani ISI-Saudi covert
war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, the crucible from which al Qaeda
later emerged. ‘Al Qaeda’, in fact, was originally the CIA’s and ISI’s
list of anti-Soviet foreign fighters in Afghanistan.
Other key suspects are New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani;
Air Force General William Hayden, later Director of the CIA and then
head of the National Security Agency (NSA), which tapped the calls of
lead hijacker Mohamed Atta and 9/11 “mastermind” Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed the day before 9/11, and surely on many other occasions
before 9/11 as well—all almost certainly without FISA warrants as
required by law. These pre-9/11 warrant-less NSA taps put the lie to
President Bush’s claim that he initiated the program of warrant-less
NSA taps of al Qaeda suspects because of—and thus only after—9/11.
Yet another key suspect is Army Lieutenant General William “Jerry”
Boykin, the radical Christian fundamentalist Special Operations commando
recently proposed to head the Army’s Special Operations Command.
Another is the Pentagon’s POP2 office, which reportedly plans and
scripts “false flag” operations—attacks planned and orchestrated by the
U.S. military but made to appear perpetrated by an outside enemy to
justify U.S. military “retaliation.” Two other key suspects are Defense
Intelligence Agency (DIA) Iran expert Lawrence “Larry” Franklin,
who was “loaned” to Perle and Wolfowitz’s neocon co-conspirator
Douglas Feith and arrested for passing national security secrets to
Israeli operatives at a meeting of top American-Israel Public Affairs
Committee (AIPAC) personnel. Franklin also was and is an officer
in the Air Force Reserves, which directed NORAD’s “Vigilant
Guardian/Vigilant Warrior” hijack-scenario exercises on 9/11.
Scrutiny should also be leveled at the scriptwriters for the
NORAD hijack-scenario and NRO plane-into-tower emergency
response exercises planned for and held on 9/11, especially members
of their lead “White Teams,” which set the content and then oversee
both “Red Team attackers” and “Blue Team defenders” on the actual
day of an exercise, in this case on 9/11 itself. And every one of the
as-yet-to-be-identified “top Pentagon officials” who on Sept. 10, 2001,
the day before 9/11, according to Newsweek, suddenly cancelled their
already-booked flights for September 11.19 Also National Military
Command Center (NMCC) commander Brig. Gen. Montague Winfield,
who on that same day, September 10, asked his deputy, Navy Capt.
Charles Leidig to take over for him the next morning between 8:30
and 10:30 -- precisely the time window of the “exercises” whose details
and date had been given to Mohammed Atta. Further investigation should
be directed at the (government) “agency”, variously reported as the sole
client of Deutsche Bank, that the 9/11 Commission revealed, without
identifying by name, took out the vast majority of the put options on
American Airlines, United Airlines, Boeing and Morgan Stanley Dean
Witter in the few days before 9/11. Also, Michael Chertoff, U.S. Attorney
for the District of New Jersey during the first 1993 attack on the World
Trade Center who, as a private attorney, represented Egyptian-born US
resident Magdy Elamir, under investigation for illegally diverting millions
of dollars and whose brother, Mohammed Elamir, funded arms smugglers
linked to al Qaeda.20 Significantly, Mohamed Atta’s name in his country
of birth, Egypt, was also Mohamed Elamir. In other words, the very man
President Bush put in charge of the entire 9/11 “investigation” as then
Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division soon to be appointed
Director of the new Department of Homeland Security -- the top official
charged with defending the U.S. mainland from an attack by al Qaeda --
may have himself been directly involved with Al Qaeda and even with
Mohamed Atta himself. In fact, Chertoff may well have been the top
Bush-Cheney insider whom we know (see above) was the source for
Atta’s finally being told the date of “his own” attack. Also, FBI
headquarters supervisor on 9/11 David Frasca and his deputy Michael
Maltbie, who ignored 70 pleas by Zacarias Moussaoui’s FBI interrogator
to let him investigate the contents of Moussaoui’s computer before 9/11.
Attention should especially be directed to Phillip Zelikow, a Bush-Cheney
White House NSC staff member along with Zalmay Khalizad to then NSC
Adviser Condoleezza Rice before and on 9/11. Zelikow both orchestrated
the 9/11 Commission Report cover up of the administration’s inside job
and, at Rice’s personal request, rewrote the Bush Administration’s official
national strategic plan draft to better match the global domination agenda
of the pre-9/11 PNAC manifesto brought to life by the Sept. 11 attacks.
Zelikow specializes in political mythologies, clearly the most important
qualification for being the orchestrator of the Official Myth of Sept. 11 --
The 9/11 Commission Report. Only someone in the innermost circle of
the real criminal conspirators would be trusted with this critical mission
of covering up their mass crime.
These are just some of the names knit into the Scroll of the
September 11 Truth Revolution.
Notes:
1A) The clock stopped at the moment the Great Earthquake hit San
Francisco on April 18, 1906 is at http://sfgate.com/greatquake/.
1B) List of widely varying initial reports of alleged Flight 77 impact times:
http://stevenwarran.blogspot.com/2007/02/when-did-pentagon-get-attackedexactly.
html.
2) This photo of a Pentagon wall clock frozen at 9:31:40 am by the first
violent event at the Pentagon was posted on an official Navy web site at:
http://www.news.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=2480Pentagonclock_BBC.
Note that whoever took this official Navy photo placed the clock in front of
a poster of the controversial Marine Corps part-helicopter/part-fixed-wing
plane the Osprey, perhaps thereby suggesting what may have struck the
building (after the inside explosions went off), if anything did. Though the
Osprey officially existed only in prototype at the time, a prototype Osprey
would be unique in that its military IFF transponder would have given off
a ‘friendly’ signal and it could have approached the Pentagon helipad
in its helicopter mode and changed over into fixed-wing plane mode at
the last second, taking defenses off guard. The “official” Pentagon clock
in the national 9/11 exhibit at the Smithsonian Institution, the electric
Skillcraft wall clock that hung on the wall of the Pentagon Heliport fire
station, is stopped at 9:31:30 -- only 10 seconds difference:
http://www.americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/search.asp?searc
h=1&keywords=Wall+clock&location= .
2A) Videotaped under-oath testimony of April Gallop to the author, Irvine,
California, March 2007, approx. two hours. This testimony formed the basis
for a lawsuit filed by Ms. Gallop.
2B) April Gallop’s watch, which was stopped just after 9:30 by the
explosion that happened at the precise moment she hit the ‘power on’ button
on her computer on the morning of 9/11, is evidence that the actual time of
the initial explosive violent at the Pentagon was closer to 9:30 than 9:32.
As the information about Gallop’s wrist watch was obtained after the first
version of this white paper was published, the author has retained 9:32
as a shorthand for the time window 9:30 to 9:32 within which, from the
subsequent additional evidence, the initial explosion at the Pentagon
occurred.
2C) Audio of Jane Graham interview, KPFA Radio, Berkeley, Calif.
http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/62892
3) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) timeline document “Executive
Summary Chronology of a Multiple Hijacking Crisis, September 11, 2001.”
4) Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Moller interview with Denmark Radio
P3, September 12, 2001, 6:15 am Denmark time. “…I saw smoke and fire
rising from the Pentagon at 9:32…My first impression was that a bomb had
been detonated at the Pentagon.” The audio of this radio interview is in the
9/11 video documentary “Bomberne som Forsvandt” by Danish researcher
Henrik Melvang, available at www.unmask.dk and at
www.bombsinsidewtc.dk. See also the 9/11 timeline by European
researcher Jose Garcia in Reality, Truth and Evil Facts, Questions and
Perspectives on September 11, 2001, Temple Lodge Publications, 2005.
4A) Naudet Brothers video:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2457244225269763926&hl=en#
at 42:27.
4B) Richard Clarke interview article at
http://www.nps.edu/About/News/Counterterrorism-Czar-Richard-Clarke-
Calls-for-New-National-Cyber-Defense-Policy-to-Prevent-a-Cyber-9/11-
.html
4C) Touching History: The Untold Story of the Drama That Unfolded
in the Skies Over America on 9/11, pp. 24-27.
5) The 9/11 Conspiracy, Catfeet Press/Open Court , James Fetzer, editor,
2006, chapter by Prof. James Fetzer; and photos of a JT8D turbojet engine
and the remnant found at the Pentagon at
http://www.simmeringfrogs.com/articles/jt8d.html.
6) Report by two civilian defense contractor employees at
“Secret Global Hawk Refit for Sky Warrior,”
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/05/318250.shtml.
6A) Rear Admiral Hathaway bio information
(http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=complete_911_timeline_
3229#complete_911_timeline_3229).
7) 9/11 -- Coup Against America: The Pentagon Analysis, compilation
of Pentagon eyewitness reports, photos and analyses with hundreds of
references, by Peter Tiradera, Book Surge LLC, 2006, available from
petertiradera@yahoo.com .
8) Perkal and Goldsmith:
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/explosive.html.
Danner: American Free Press, July 7, 2006, reporting based on audio
report by Republic Broadcasting Network, summary at
http://www.total911.info/2006/07/pentagon-eyewitness-ids-globalhawk.
html.
9) Author interview with former Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict, Monterey, California;
summary posted on Naval Postgraduate School web site www.nps.navy.mil,
subsequently changed to www.nps.edu. Article no longer posted; hard copy
available from the author.
9A) Personal communication to the author by Rhett Flater, Executive
Director of the American Helicopter Society.
9B) “Chilling Aerial Photos of 9/11 Attack Released: Police Aerial Photos
Show World Trade Center Collapse”
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=9796098.
10) Videotaped testimony of William (“Willy”) Rodriguez, former World
Trade Center janitor and the last person to leave the WTC alive on
September 11, in the 9/11 documentary “Loose Change,” second edition,
text in parentheses added: “All of a sudden we hear ‘Boom!’ in the
basement. I thought it was a generator that blew up, and I said to myself,
‘Oh, my God, I think it was a generator. And I was going to verbalize it,
and when I finished saying that in my mind I heard (another, second)
‘Boom!’ right on the top (above), pretty far away. And so it was a
difference (in space and time) between coming from the basement and
coming from the top…and a person comes running into the office (in
the first basement level, from a deeper basement level) saying
‘Explosion!’…and he said ‘(it was from) The elevators!’ And there
were many (deep basement WTC1) explosions.”
11) “Agency (NRO) Planned Exercise on September 11 Built Around a
Plane Crashing into a Building,” Associated Press, August 22, 2002; by
Jonathan Lumpkin; “They Scrambled Jets, but It was a Race They Couldn’t
Win,” Syracuse Post-Standard, January 20, 2002, by Hart Seely; “Rome
Staff’s Efforts on 9/11 Earn Praise, Commission Says Military Did
the Best It Could with the Information It Had,” Syracuse Post-Standard,
June 18, 2004, by Hart Seely; Complete 9/11 Military Exercises Timeline,
Cooperative Research, at
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_ti
meline&before-9/11=militaryExercises;
Crossing the Rubicon, by Michael Ruppert, Chapter 19: “Wargames
and High Tech: Paralyzing the System to Pull Off the Attacks” and
Chapter 20: “Q&A: Many Asked, Some Answered––and a Golden
Moment,” New Society Publishers, 2004. In the Acknowledgements
to Rubicon, p. xi, Ruppert credits the author with what he refers to as
“the Holy Grail of 9/11 research” (p. 336): Thanks to Barbara Honegger,
who kept hammering on the wargames until we all paid notice…
you showed me the most important lead I needed to put it all together.”
12) “Detainee’s Suit Gains Support from Jet’s Log,” New York Times,
March 30, 2005, p. A1. Key excerpt, text in parentheses added: “Mr. Arar
(a “rendered” detainee) says he followed the (Gulfstream jet) plane’s
movements on a map displayed on a video screen (inside the plane),
watching it as he traveled to Dulles Airport outside Washington, to a
Maine Airport he believed was in Portland (Maine), to Rome, and finally
to Amman, Jordan, where he was blindfolded and driven to Syria.”
Though the FAA claims its records show a plane on that date making
the other stops but landing in Bangor, not Portland , Maine, the detainee’s
account may be accurate, as only Portland ’s airport is labeled an
“International Jet Port ,” specializing in landings and takeoffs of just
such private, corporate and government jets.
13) Ironically, at the final hearing of the Kean Commission, where its report
was released to the press and public, commissioner John Lehman responded
to the question, What if anything remained unknown, by noting that the
Commission still wasn’t clear as to “how Atta chose the date for the attacks.”
14) Summary interrogation of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, claimed
“mastermind” of the September 11 attack plot, read into the Zacarias
Moussaoui sentencing trial record by the prosecution on March 27, 2006;
the full text is part of the court proceedings transcript for that date available
through Exemplaris.com.
15) The 9/11 Commission Report, note 116, p. 458, at http://www.9-
11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf. Key excerpt: “On 9/11,
NORAD was scheduled to conduct a military exercise, Vigilant Guardian,
which postulated a bomber attack from the former Soviet Union .”
15A) http://www.judicialwatch.org/1967.shtml
15B) http://truthmovecom.blogspot.com/2008/07/jerome-hauer-911-
suspect-awaiting.html
* * *