Military journalist
Barbara Honneger's inside view of 9/11
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 20:05:06 -0700 From: "Dick
Eastman"
<dharma@nwinfo.net>
Jack Yolam was right. While I have concentrated on
just a few lines of photo evidence, Barbara Honneger has
researched a complete history of the 9-11 treason at the
Pentagon -- extremely important evidence I had forgotten,
evidence and witnesses -- inside witnesses -- I never
heard of -- all making the grand case against the
traitors. Who really knows about the Pentagon attack? I
say Barbara Honneger does. What a journalist! What an
American! --Dick Eastman
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:uNfHsSzwW5EJ:blog.lege.net/content-
/Seven_Hours_in_September.pdf+%22seven+hours+in+september:+the+clock+-
that+broke+the+lie%22+by+barbara+honegger&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1&cl-
ient=firefox-a
This is the html version of the file http://blog.lege.net/content/Seven_Hours_in_September.pdf.
Seven Hours in September: The Clock that
Broke the Lie
by Barbara Honegger, M.S.
Note: This analysis and evidence summary will be
published in The 9/11 Terror Conspiracy, the updated
second edition of Jim Marrs' 9/11 expose book Inside Job.
Barbara Honegger, M.S. is Senior Military Affairs
Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School (1995 -
current), the Navy's advanced science, technology and
national security affairs university. This Appendix, as
all of Honegger'spublications on Sept. 11, are solely in
her capacity as a concerned private citizen and do not
imply official endorsement. Honegger served as Special
Assistant to the Assistant to the President and White
House Policy Analyst (1981-83); was the first public
resignation of conscience from the Reagan-Bush Sr.
Administration; was the pioneering Iran-gate author and
whistleblower on the October Surprise (October Surprise,
Tudor, 1989) and Iran-Contra expose documentary
"Cover-Up"); and was called as a
researcher-witness for both the Oct. 23, 2004, and Aug.
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 9/11 evidence
summary and analysis was presented at the L.A. Citizens
Grand Jury hearings and at the 9/11 Emergency Truth
Convergence conference held at American University in
Washington, D.C. in July 2005. ___
The San Francisco Chronicle commemorated the 100th
anniversary of The Great Quake of 1906 with a series of
front page articles headed by a single icon-a charred
clock frozen at 5:12 a.m., the exact moment "The Big
One"hit(1). A
century after that devastating event, the stopped clock
serves as both the ultimate evidence and the symbol that
"captures it all."
Again, almost 100 years later, clocks frozen in time at
the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001 both
"capture it all" and are the ultimate evidence
that shatters the "Official Lie" of what
happened that terrible morning.
The Pentagon was first attacked at 9:32 a.m., much
earlier than the 9/11 Commission and official cover story
claim. (In this summary of evidence, the more precise
time of 9:31:40 a.m. is "rounded up" for ease
of reference.)
The Pentagon and mainstream media first reported 9:45 as
the time of alleged Flight 77 impact (some reports,
presumably taken from official sources, were as late as
9:48 and 9:47). Over time, the time given by officials
for the claimed outside impact on the building has been
moved earlier and earlier, down to 9:37 (as of the time
of this writing), but has never come close to the actual
time of the first violent event at the Pentagon-9:32.
Obviously, if the official story that Flight 77 hit the
Pentagon at 9:37 is true, Flight 77 could not have been
the source of massive damage in the west side of the
building five minutes earlier at 9:32.
Converging Lines of Proof of a
9:32 Violent Event at the Pentagon on Sept. 11.
Multiple standard-issue, battery-operated wall clocks on
the walls of the area of the Pentagon attacked
on9/11-including one in the heliport just outside the
west face-were stopped between 9:31 and 9:32-1/2 by a
violentevent, almost certainly a bomb or bombs inside the
building and/or in a truck parked outside the west face.
The first Associated Press report stated that the
Pentagon had been damaged by a "booby trapped
truck." The Navy posted thestopped heliport clock on
an
official website and another of the stopped clocks is in
the 9/11 display at the Smithsonian Institution.(2) These are just some of the
west section Pentagon clocks that stopped between 9:31
and 9:32-1/2.
The FAA's [Federal Aviation Administration] timeline
document "Executive Summary--Chronology of a
Multiple Hijacking Crisis --September 11, 2001"
reads: "0932: ATC (Air Traffic Control) AEA reports
aircraft crashes into west side of Pentagon."(3) The time is the critical fact
here, not
the claimed cause. Denmark's soon-to-be Foreign Minister
Per Stig Moller was in a building in Washington, D.C. on
9/11 fromwhich he looked out, heard the explosion and saw
the smoke first rise from the Pentagon. He immediately
looked at his watch, which read 9:32 a.m. He
gave radio interviews in Denmark the next morning in
which he stated that the Pentagon had been attacked at
9:32.(4)
On August 27, 2002, then White House Counsel and now
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales gave theSecretary of
the Navy lecture at the Naval Postgraduate School in
which Gonzales explicitly and clearly states that
"The Pentagon was attacked at 9:32". This tape
was played at the
9/11 Emergency Truth Convergence at American University
in Washington, D.C. in July, 2005.
The Pentagon was attackedby
bomb(s)at 9:32 a.m., apparently followedby an impact from
an airborne object significantly smaller than Flight 77.
I have interviewed an Army auditor from
Ft. Monmouth, New Jersey, who was on temporary duty
assignmentat 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, 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 summary, but is willing to testify to a
grand jury or independent official investigation.
This Army financial management/audit area is part of, or
contiguous to, the Army personnel offices, which was one
of two main west section offices heavily destroyed in the
Pentagon attack, the other being the NavalCommand Center.
The day before 9/11, Sept. 10, Secretary of Defense
Rumsfeld held a press conference at which he acknowledged
that the Pentagon was "missing"-could not
account for and needed to "find"-$2.3 Trillion
dollars.Were the auditors who could "follow the
money," and the computers whose data could help them
do it, intentionallytargeted? It is worth noting that Dov
Zakheim, the Pentagon's comptroller -- Rumsfeld's top
financial officer -- at the
time who also acknowledged the "missing"
trillions, had a company that specializes in aircraft
remote-control technology. As remnants found in the
Pentagon wreckage have been identified as the front-hub
assembly of the front compressor of an 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 secretly retrofitted to be remote-controlled
drones and fitted with missiles in a highly compartmented
operation at Ft. Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport in
Colorado in the months before 9/11(6),
the question further arises as to whether Pentagon
auditors and their computerized data were intentionally
targeted on9/11.
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 Pentagon
atapproximately 7:30 a.m. on 9/11. He said that K-9 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 usually search for airliners, but bombs, a bomb
attack was clearly anticipated.
Survivor eyewitnesses from inside the west section of the
Pentagon reported that the blast caused its windows first
to expand outwards, and then inwards.(7)
Multiple witnesses said they smelled cordite after the
explosion at the Pentagon, an explosive which has a
distinct smell very different from that of burning jet
fuel.(8)
Even Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld told Sam Donaldson in
an ABC News interview shortly after 9/11 that he first
thought a bomb had gone off in the building. Donaldson:
"What did you think it was?" Rumsfeld: "A
bomb? I had no idea."
It is important to note that bomb explosion(s) at 9:32
a.m. on the ground floor of the west section of the
Pentagon are not inconsistent with there having also been
a later-or even near-simultaneous-impact by a
pilotedplane, unmanned drone, or missile into the same or
nearby
section of the building, which may be the cause of
thecollapse of the wall approximately 20 minutes after
the initial violent event. Indeed, if a heat-seeking
missile hit the building after the bombs went off, the
heat from the explosion(s) would become the target for
the missile. Recall that the A-3 Sky Warriors were
retrofitted shortly before 9/11 not only to be remotely
controlled, but also fitted with missiles. The
round-shaped exit hole in the inner wall of the
"C" Ring is evidence that a missile or a
piloted or pilot-less remote-controlled plane
significantly smaller than Flight 77 also struck the
building subsequent to bombs going off, penetrated the
inside of the third ring, as bomb detonations would not
have resulted in such a near symmetricalround-shaped
opening.
I have interviewed the then Acting Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Special Operations on 9/11, Robert
Andrews-the top civilian official in charge of special
operations under Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld-a former
Green Beret and whose office was on the second floor of
the South section of the Pentagon, adjacent to the West
section. While drawing the path that he took that morning
on a sketch of the Pentagon, he revealed the following:
Immediately after the second World Trade Center attack of
9:03 a.m., 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 teleconference of
top governmentofficials run by Richard Clarke out of the
White House Situation Room media room. Clarke, in his
book Against All Enemies, confirmed that Rumsfeld was
among the first officials on this teleconference shortly
after the second WTC tower was hit. Andrews' confirmation
of Clarke's account is completely at odds with the
official cover story and the 9/11 Commission, which claim
that no one could locate Rumsfeld until
approximately10:30 a.m. when he walked into the National
Military Command Center (NMCC). The fact that Rumsfeld,
the military's top civlian official, was on Clarke's
teleconference with the top official of the FAA, Director
Jane Garvey, also puts the complete lie to the official
cover story that interceptors weren't scrambled in time
because the military and FAA "couldn't talk each
other" on the morning of 9/11. The top-most
officials of the Pentagon and FAA were talking to one
another constantly on Clarke's teleconference from as
early as 9:15. This taped Clarke teleconference is the
"Butterfield tape" of 9/11. [During the 1970s
Watergate scandal, secretly-made tapes of
President Nixon's Oval Office conversations revealed by
presidential tape supervisor Alexander Butterfield were
the "smoking guns" which forced Nixon to resign
or face certain impeachment and trial in the Senate.]
Immediately after the second WTC tower was struck at 9:03
a.m., Andrews and his aide left his office and ran asfast
as they could down to the Secretary of Defense's West
section basement Counterterrorism Center (CTC), beneath
the ground-level location of the violent event in the
building that morning, arriving at approx. 9:10. While he
and his aide were in this west side basement CTC, a
violent event caused the ceiling tiles to fall off 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 setfast to ensure timely arrivals 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 his Executive Support Center (ESC)
across the hall from Rumsfeld's main office. Rumsfeld was
already on the White House teleconference when they
arrived. En route toRumsfeld's ESC, Andrews said when he
and his aide entered the corridor on the inside ring of
the West section, "we had to walk over
dead bodies" to get to the inner courtyard. (Note:
This is two rings further in towards the center fromthe
inner most hole made by whatever impacted the Pentagon
that morning.)
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 for Clarke's White
Houseteleconference. Andrews also said that Secretary of
Defense
Rumsfeld talked with President Bush while in the Pentagon
Executive Support Center. Whether this was via the
teleconference or by phone or other means was not stated.
The fact that Rumsfeld personally communicated with Bush
while Rumsfeld was in his Pentagon ESC has been published
on anofficial DoD web site.(9)
WTC janitor William Rodriquez, the last person to leave
the WTC alive on 9/11, has testified that he was in the
firstbasement level of the WTC when an immense explosion
went off below him in the yet-deeper subbasement level(s)
of the building a few seconds before the plane hit the
tower high above.(10)Robert
Andrews revealed that the west side basement level of the
Pentagon was damaged at approx. 9:32 a.m. and as we know
that the cause of the 9:32 Pentagon attack was not an
impact event but explosives, there are thus eye- and ear
witness reports of bombs damaging both the Pentagon and
the WTC underground level(s) before both buildings were
hit from the outside.
As no "outside terrorist", al-Qaeda or
otherwise, could have had access to the Pentagon or the
sustained advance access needed to pre-place explosives
inside the WTC, only domestic insiders could have placed
explosives in both the Pentagon and the WTC.
Further, because the WTC deep-basement explosions(s)
happened before the Tower was hit by a plane; and as any
incoming plane not controlled by the same party that
triggered the sub-basement detonation(s) could have
veered off fromthe building at the last second ruining
the plane-impact-as-cover-story for the later collapse of
the buildings; and as the deep sub-basement explosions
were necessary for the later collapse of the buildings by
controlled demolition, the same
domestic-U.S. insider party had to have controlled both
the sub-basement detonations and the incoming plane(s).
Thus, even if al-Qaeda hijackers were on the incoming
planes, they were not in final control of the impact of
the planes into the buildings, which had to have been
guaranteed by domestic/U.S. insider controllers to ensure
the sub-basement bombs didn't go off prematurely and
destroy the plane impact cover story.
Because the real modus operandi at the Pentagon and WTC
are so similar, it is logical to deduce that the
samedomestic-U.S. terrorists were responsible for placing
and detonating bombs-both inside the WTC and inside the
Pentagon. That is, a single group of U.S.-domestic
conspirators-not al-Qaeda or any other outside
terrorists-must have planned both the WTC and Pentagon
attacks and controlled both the approaching planes and
the inside-the-building explosions in realtime
on 9/11.
In addition to the already-well-known evidence that
Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, i.e. the small hole
in the west side of the Pentagon being not nearly large
enough for Flight 77's fuselage, let alone wing width; no
damage to the lawn where Flight 77 allegedly struck and
skidded before hitting the building; wrecked plane parts
at the site being identified as being froman A-3 Sky
Warrior, a far smaller plane than that of Flight 77;
requests to TV media on the morning of 9/11 not to take
up-close images, etc.-there is also official evidence
that Flight 77 did not hit the building:
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, revealedthat
he ordered one of his jets to fly down low over the
Pentagon shortly after the attack there that morning, and
that this pilot reported back that there was no evidence
that a plane had hit the building. NORAD Gen. Larry
Arnold said this fighterjet-not Flight 77-is almost
certainly the plane seen on the Dulles airport Air
Traffic Controller's screen making a steep, high-speed
270-degree descent before disappearing from the radar.
[When a plane flies low enough to be undetected, it is
called being "under the radar."]
Military pilots-like the pilot sent by Gen. Arnold on
9/11 to report on the Pentagon's damage-are trained to
fly 500 feet above ground in order to evade radar
detection. In fact, when the Air Traffic Controller and
her colleagues watched the extremely difficult 270-degree
flight maneuver on her screen, they were certain that the
plane whose blip they were watching perform this
extremely difficult maneuver was a U.S. military
aircraft, and said so at the time. It almost certainly
was.
Thus, the likely reason the Pentagon has refused to lower
the current official time of "Flight 77" impact
from 9:37 to9:32 a.m.-the actual time of the first
explosions there-is that they decided to pretend the blip
represented by Arnold'ssurveillance jet approaching just
before 9:37 was "Flight 77". As the official
cover story claims that the alleged 9:37 impact was the
only Pentagon attack that morning, and by the time
Arnold's surveillance jet arrived on the scene the
violent event had already happened, the Pentagon cannot
acknowledge the earlier 9:32 time without revealing an
attack on the building prior to impact.
It is significant that the The 9/11 Commission Report
ignores the testimony of Secretary of Transportation
Norman Mineta to its own commission and did this only for
the testimony of Secretary Mineta. The clear reason for
this blatant and targeted censorship is that Mineta's
eyewitness testimony is extremely dangerous to the
official cover story.The portion of Mineta's testimony
that is particularly dangerous is his claim that Vice
President Cheney, in charge in the Presidential Emergency
Operations Center (PEOC) beneath the White House since
before Mineta arrived in the PEOCat 9:20, insisted to an
incredulous "young man" that "the orders
(given earlier by Cheney to this same individual) still
stand" when the man told Cheney that the presumed
plane they had been tracking as a blip on a screen was
50, then 30, and finally just 10 miles from
Washington-orders which could only have been to not shoot
down the plane. Otherwise there would have been no reason
for the agent to ask Cheney if they "still"
stood, despite the plane's being almost upon the Capital
where Cheney himself was. This is critical because of the
timing that can be inferred from Mineta's testimony: As
Mineta arrived at the PEOC at 9:20 a.m., and as Mineta
estimated the "still stand?" interaction
betweenCheney and the agent happened 5 to 6 minutes after
that, or about 9:25, it can be inferred based on the
officially given speed of the plane represented by the
blip of 540 mph that whatever that fast-approaching blip
represented, it arrived inthe vicinity of the Pentagon at
approximately 9:32-nowhere close to the original official
cover story time of 9:45, or even the
eight-minute-earlier time the Pentagon finally settled on
for an impact
time of 9:37.
All of this also happened at 9:32:
After an inexplicable delay during which they knew that
both WTC towers were under attack, the Secret Service
suddenly acts as if the attacks are "real,"
rushing President Bush out of the library at the Florida
school where he had been reading to children.
Firefighters are ordered out of WTC 1.
The New York Stock Exchange is ordered closed.
The takeover of Flight 93 begins with the stabbing of a
flight attendant and one of the hijackers announcing that
there is a bomb on board, picked up by flight
controllers.
Other relevant interviews:
I interviewed the famous "lone 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 all the other cars have left the freeway. 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 planehaving impacted
the building nor any visible plane pieces on the lawn at
the time he arrived, which was after the first violent
event in the building, as black smoke was streaming up
and to the right from inside-the-building fires. The
taxicab driver drew a diagram of what he saw that morning
while overlooking the Pentagon's west face from I-395.
I interviewed a Navy public affairs officer assigned to
the Naval Command Center, one of the two major Pentagon
West section areas destroyed on 9/11, the other being the
Army Personnel / Financial Management/Auditarea as
mentioned earlier. This officer was not in the building
that morning but was quickly assigned as the deputy
public affairs officer at the underground "back-up
Pentagon" location in Pennsylvania close to the
Maryland border, Site R. This eyewitness Navy
officer inside Site R said Deputy Secretary of Defense
Paul Wolfowitz and later Vice President Cheney were flown
to the Site R underground bunker in response to Richard
Clarke's officially declaring "Continuity of
Government/Continuity of Operations" (COG/COOP) on
the morning of
9/11. This is confirmed inClarke's book, Against All
Enemies, in which he reports that Rumsfeld chose
Wolfowitz to be the designatedCOG/COOP official at Site R
in his stead. Perhaps significantly Site R and Camp David
are not far from the crash site of Flight 93. Details
about Site
R, on and after 9/11, are also in James Bamford's book, A
Pretext for War.
On Feb. 4, 2004, I interviewed General Ralph Eberhart,
Commander of NORAD on 9/11. To my knowledge, Gen.
Eberhart has granted no other interview since the events
of Sept. 11. Before asking questions, I gave Gen.
Eberhartcopies of all the mainstream press articles
published as
of that date on the subject of the confusion of his NORAD
Northeast Sector (NEADS) personnel who were running
NORAD's "Vigilant Guardian/Vigilant Warrior"
emergency response war game exercises that morning.(11)As of the date of the
interview, therefore, the then head of NORAD was made
aware of the early confusion caused by his own NEADS
"game" players on the morning of 9/11 due to
incomingexercise reports and incoming reports of the
actual hijack attacks.
I first asked Gen. Eberhart if there was any connection
between NORAD's "Vigilant
Guardian/VigilantWarrior" exercise being run that
morning and the plane-crashing-into-tower emergency
response exercise simultaneously being held at National
Reconnaissance Office (NRO)
headquarters outside Washington, D.C. He replied,
"No." I was surprised as a large portion of NRO
personnel are from the Air Force, his own agency. I asked
for reconfirmation, to which he again said,
"No." Laying the ground for the next question,
I mentioned the fact that "game" director Lt.
Col. Dawne Deskins had said that she was confused as to
whether initial reports of the hijacked planes on the
morning of 9/11 were "for real" or "part
of the game." This showed that the NORAD
exercises that morning had tohave been concerning a
hijack scenario at least similar to that of the actual
attacks. Otherwise, there would have been nogrounds for
confusion. Considering this information, Gen. Eberhart
refused to answer any further questions and abruptly
ended the interview.
In addition to the already well known and officially
acknowledged evidence of Bush Administration
foreknowledge of the broad outlines of the Sept. 11
attacks-advance warnings from the intelligence agencies
of as many as 11 foreign countries, the content of the
now-famous Aug. 6, 2001 presidential daily brief (whose
10-page attachment still has not been made public),
etc.-there are three converging lines of evidence that
Bush Administration insiders had near perfect-if not
complete-advance knowledge of both the details and the
date of the Sept. 11 attack:
(Note: The idea that Bush Administration insiders had
advance knowledge of the details and the date of
an"outside" attack is not inconsistent with
U.S. insiders having facilitated and even orchestrated
the attacks. The plot behind the attacks of Sept. 11 is
similar to that of the Reichstag fire, which aided Hitler
to rapidly consolidate power - that is, like the
Nazi-facilitated Reichstag fire, there was a real
though-unlikely-to-succeed "outside" plot to
which Administration insiders gained intelligence. They
then secretly protected and enabled this plot to ensure
that it not onlysucceeded, but succeeded spectacularly as
the Psychological Operation needed to justify the entire
subsequent Bush-Cheney Administration global and domestic
agenda.)
1)
Shortly after Sept. 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 had initiated the
tapbefore 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 9/11 hijackers before 9/11.
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 the surveillance
of the 9/11 hijackers up to and including the day of
9/11.
Zacharias 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 knows he can prove it. How
could this be the case? If Moussaoui was one of the
"up to 20" al-Qaeda-linked terrorist suspects
surveilled before 9/11 without anadvance FISA warrant as
reported by Newsweek, then Moussaoui was also one of the
"up to 20" whose taps Judge Lamberth had
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 initiated before a warrant
has been applied for, as in this case, the court has to
inform the "target" of the surveillance and
give him the government's stated reason in the
surveillance application for the tap. Moussaoui says that
he can "prove" the BushAdministration/FBI
initiated surveillance on him before
9/11 because, it can be deduced, the FISA Court itself
told him so after Lambergh ordered his - and those of the
other "up to 20" - surveillance ended.
If this is the case, it opens the very real possibility
that the FISA Court likewise informed most or all 19 of
the "up to 20" 9/11 hijackers before 9/11 that
they were being surveilled by the Bush Administration-and
the reason for such surveillance. This also 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 Mohammed 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 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 later. The likely reason for this
intentional lie about when Atta first enteredthe 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 cover story
is why would Atta drive to Portland, Maine, on Sept.
10,the day before 9/11, then fly from Portland to Boston
early on the morning of Sept. 11. The answer to this
"mystery," which the FBI clearly already knows,
is the link between what Atta was doing in Portland,
before the administration wants to admit he was 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 all may have
something to do with the fact that special-and sometimes
secret-CIA flights are run out of an airport in Portland,
Maine.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 met there for what the Kean Commission calls
the "final 9/11 planning meeting." (Some Bush
Administration officials now also believe that 9/11
"mastermind" Khalid Sheikh
Page 7
Mohammed (KSM) was at this critical meeting as well.)
This cannot be-and is not-a coincidence. O'Neill, who was
in close contact with German intelligence-recall that
Atta led the "German cell" for the 9/11
attacks-and Spanish intelligence, had clearly been
alerted to the upcoming meeting and was at the hotel to
surveil/tap/bugthe room where the meeting was about to be
held. O'Neill and his agency, the Bush Administration's
FBI, thus knew every detail, or almost every detail, of
the planned 9/11 plot at least two months in advance.
Perhaps as significantly, European media reported that
bin Laden was in an American hospital in Dubai for
surgery in early July 2001 and would have likely been
recuperating and incapacitated there at the time of the
"final 9/11 Planning Meeting" in Spain a few
days later. Reportedly, bin Laden was also visited in the
hospital by the area's then CIA Station chief. The
question naturally arises as to whether bin Laden was
telephoned by Atta, Binalshibh, and perhaps 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 BushAdministration-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
almostcertainly also all the key "outside"
conspirators plotting their "final plans"
including possibly bin Laden himself, on tape-obviously
another "Butterfield" tape to be demanded under
subpoena.
3)
As noted above, on 9/11 itself the U.S. military was
conducting NORAD/Air Force emergency response exercises
with scenarios of multiple hijacks and the NRO was
conducting an emergency response exercise on the scenario
of a plane crashing into one of the towers at its
headquarters just outside Washington, D.C.11- many NRO
personnel being from the Air Force. It is next to
impossible for this to have been the case unless the
exercises, also referred to by the 9/11 truth community
as war games, were intentionally scripted to mirror what
had been learned from the above-mentioned detailed
advance intelligence. The purpose of the war games held
on9/11 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 tracking, and the FBI's FISA-warrant-less
surveillance of the "up to 20"
("19"?) suspected al-Qaeda terrorists had
already revealed. You don't practice
something in a multi-million-dollar set of exercises that
you "can't imagine." The date for the actual
attacks-Sept. 11-was then chosen to coincide with the
Pentagon's exercises, which in turn mirrored the real
attack plans.
Perhaps the most burning data point to prove Bush
Administration complicity is the fact that leadhijacker
Mohammed Atta took to the mid-July "final 9/11
planning meeting" in Spain the information
that"the date 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 or by late August, 2001.(13)Atta
is clearly waiting to learn the date of "his
own"attack. This last piece of the puzzle fell into
place during the first phase of Zacarias Moussaoui's
sentencing trial. It was found in the 58-page transcript
of 9/11"mastermind" Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's
interrogation"testimony" read into the trial
record by the Bush Administration prosecution. In the KSM
transcript, it is revealed that bin Laden and KSM
"allowed Atta to choose" both the final targets
for the attacks and the attackdate."(14)From this, therefore, we know
that neither bin Laden nor "mastermind" KSM nor
"coordinator"Binalshibh set the Sept. 11 attack
date. However, from what Atta said to Binalshibh - and
probably also KSM and possibly also bin Laden by phone
link - at the "Final Planning Meeting" in
Spain, we also know that neither did Atta. Atta was
waiting to learn the date of his "own" attack,
and that date didn't come from any of his al-Qaeda
superiors. It must be the case then that, despite KSM's
claim that he "let" Atta choose the date, none
of the top"outside terrorist"
conspirators set the date for the Sept. 11 attacks,
including Atta.
The key and central fact of the entire 9/11 plot is that
the attack date Atta was "waiting for" was the
dateof the Bush Administration's planned war games,
which, in a vicious circle, were scripted to mirror the
content of Atta's attack plan gleaned via advance
intelligence obtained from O'Neill's surveillance of the
"final planningmeeting" near Tarragona, the
Pentagon's "Able Danger" tracking of Atta and,
and the FBI's warrant-less surveillance of Atta and other
of the about-to-be hijackers. Atta was thus the sole
individual to whom the date the Bush Administration
finally chose for its war games was leaked 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" near
Tarragona. The Number One Bush Administration insider
conspirator, therefore, is whoever gave the
Administration's own war game scenario details and date
to Mohammed Atta.
Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed, as the head of Pakistan's
military intelligence agency ISI, ordered $100,000 wired
to Atta shortly before 9/11. On the morning of 9/11, he
was having breakfast with future CIA Director Porter J.
Goss and the senator who co-chaired the joint
House/Senate 9/11 "investigation" following the
attacks. And as Gen. Ahmed was in Washington in the three
days leading up to 9/11 meeting with CIA Director George
Tenet and top officials at the Pentagon, which was about
to conduct the war games, Gen. Ahmed is the top candidate
for the "middle man" who was told the date and
details of the Pentagon's emergency response exercises
and communicated them, directly or through an
intermediary, to Atta. Atta then confirmed the 9/11 date
for the war games-which was the date of the attacks-in
his now-famous NSA-intercepted phone call with KSM of
Sept. 10, in which he related, "The Match is about
to begin. Zero hour is tomorrow." "Match"
is a way of saying "test exercise" or "war
game." This intercept almost certainly
was made without an advance FISA warrant.
One of the abiding "mysteries" of Sept. 11 is
why Gen. Eberhart, the commander of NORAD on 9/11,
claimedto the 9/11 Commission that on the morning of 9/11
NORAD was conducting, among others, a preplanned
"Soviet-era" emergency response exercise(15)in which U.S. fighter jets
were to defend against Russian nuclear bombers. After
all, 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 had conducted another emergency
response exercise 40 years earlier, which completely
cleared the skies over the mainland U.S. This was on Oct.
14, 1961, in a war game called "Sky Shield II",
which was based on a scenario of how to defend against an
air attack by Soviet bombers on New York City.(16)The main difference between
the 1961 exercise and Sept. 11 is that the clearing of
the skies was announced in advance to the public in
"Sky Shield". This original Soviet-era
exercise, 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 mentioned in the Air Force's own account
of the events of Sept. 11, Air War Over America. In fact,
Gen. LarryArnold, 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 Sept. 11 NORAD "Soviet-era" war game
scenarios include attacks on New York City; in the 1961
exercise, U.S. military planes played the role of 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 Gen.
Eberhart's testimonyto the 9/11 Commission is correct,
NORAD may have been conducting a "Soviet-era"
exercise much like the one in 1961, on 9/11.
In this light, it is significant that mainstream press
stories contain intriguing reports that point to the
possibility that there were two American Airlines
"Flight 11" 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
hijacked 9/11 flight numbers possibly being
"twinned,"(17)or
copied. The question naturally arises, were these
"twinned" NORAD flights U.S. military planes
"playing" hijacked airliner
"attackers," similar to the 1961 scenario
except substituting commandeered airliners for Soviet
bombers?And could the 9/11 exercise 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 the New York Times articles during the
1961 NORAD 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. 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 [like the myriad small pieces of metal scrap
found on the Pentagon lawn and Shanksville, Pennsylvania
"crash" site on 9/11?].that will throw
radarscopes [including the FAA's] into a confusion of
false signals."; "All the bomber missions were
laid out ahead of time and fed into the NORAD
computer"; "An automated shorthand
runningdisplay of the entire battle was provided at NORAD
combat center and in similar centers at Strategic Air
Commandheadquarters [where President Bush was taken on
9/11] and in the Pentagon [which was attacked on
9/11]"; "A fight plan for every aircraft
[private, commercial and military] 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 Oct. 14, 1961] were marked K, for Faker.'"; and
"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 were
used?]" The 1961 war game 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, 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 Mohammed Atta received training.
The Pentagon's "Able Danger" data miners now
claim that "Department of Defense
lawyers"-almost certainly from the National Security
Agency, then headed by Gen. Hayden, of the same service
that planned the 9/11 war games, theAir Force-blocked
planned meetings with the FBI in which they wanted to
tell the FBI that they had "tracked" Atta and
others of the 9/11 hijackers prior to 9/11 and ask the
FBI to initiate further 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 is strong evidence that,
despite their current claims to the contrary, the
Pentagon's "Able Danger" team did communicate
what they learned from tracking Atta and the others to
the FBI before 9/11, and that the FBI then initiated
FISA-warrant-less surveillances of Atta and others
subsequently ordered stopped by then Chief FISA Court
Judge Lamberth - all of this 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. FBI Headquarters
supervisors David Frasca and his deputy Maltbie refused
70 - seventy -
urgent requests by Moussaoui's FBI interrogator and by
Coleen Rowley in the Minneapolis FBI office, for either a
FISA Court warrant or an "ordinary" criminal
warrant to get into Moussaoui's computer and surveil
anyone mentioned therein. Doing so would have clearly
stopped the plot, as Moussaoui now claims he personally
knew 17-almost all- of the 19 hijackers.(18)
In addition to all the evidence that the idea of plane
impacts plus fire causing destruction was a carefully
planned cover story for the collapse of WTC 1, 2 and 7,
as well as for the initial violent event at the Pentagon,
the otheroverwhelming line of evidence for 9/11 as an
"Inside Job" are the anthrax attacks.
Any evidence linking 9/11 to the anthrax letters-dated
Sept. 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. Dietrick,
Maryland, and at theUniversity of Iowa in Ames, Iowa. It
was also high-spore-count, military-grade weaponized
anthrax refined according to a trade secret held
reportedly held by William Patrick, former Ft. Detrick
bioweapons expert, 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
PNAC manifesto calling for "a new Pearl
Harbor."
On Sept. 11, this same Jerry Hauer personally delivered
anti-anthrax 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
PresidentCheney and other Bush Administration 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 a
deafening silence. On Sept. 10, 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 Sept. 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
exercisewas Sept. 11, as so many personnel were already
in place on Sept. 10. As the Air Force's war game
scenario 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 their
counter-bioterrorism "exercise" Tripod II? Is
this why the anti-anthrax drug Cipro was distributed to
the WhiteHouse, "just in case"? If so, it would
be strong evidence that Tripod II was on the scenario of
defending New York City against an anthrax attack. Was
the "vector," or delivery vehicle, for that
emergency response exercise scenario anthrax attack to
have been by air via airplane?
Notably, in their book on bioterrorism, 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
largequantities of cyanide out into New York City. Khalid
Sheikh Mohammed, the "mastermind" of 9/11, is
Ramzi Yousef's uncle. Finally, former New York City mayor
Rudolf Giuliani testified to the 9/11 Commission that
when WTC 7, which held his emergency operations center,
collapsed on 9/11, he moved those operations to the
command and control center setup on Pier 92 for the
"Tripod II" bio-terrorism exercise and that it
even worked 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,
(Page 10) 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 biochemical 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 search and rescue effort was completed."
Conclusion
The U.S. military, not al-Qaeda, had the access to plant
explosives inside its own most heavily defended
worldheadquarters, the Pentagon. The U.S. military, not
al- Qaeda, had the access to plant the explosives Willy
Rodriquez heard and felt go off deep in the sub-basement
of the World Trade Center. The U.S. military, not
al-Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to
plant controlled demolition charges throughout the
superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC2, and in WTC 7, which
brought down all three buildings on 9/11. The U.S.
military, not al-Qaeda, had access to the sulfur-enhanced
military-grade thermite detected in the sub-basement
levels of the WTC needed to melt the steel found
moltenthere weeks later. The U.S. military, not al-Qaeda,
would have chosen the least populated and most reinforced
section of the Pentagon - its newly upgraded west wedge -
to target in a strike, minimizing casualties. Real
terrorists would have maximized them. A U.S. military
plane, not one piloted by al-Qaeda, performed the highly
skilled, high-speed 270-degree dive towards the Pentagon
that Air Traffic Controllers on 9/11 were sure was a
military plane as they watched it on their screens. Only
a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by
al-Qaeda, would have given off the "friendly"
signal needed to disable 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 all
of its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own
emergency response system. Real terrorist hijackers would
never have chosen routes back to their intended targets
that flew over or near military bases, which the 9/11
planes did. Only the U.S. military, not al-Qaeda, would
have access to the weaponized, military-grade U.S. Army
"Ames strain' anthrax
contained in letters mailed only to Democratic
Congressional leaders. It is absurd to believe al-Qaeda
would target only Democrats, especially as the U.S.
leadership at the time of 9/11 was Republican. After
receiving 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 President Bush and Vice President Cheney. When he
received his anthrax letter, another Democratic leader,
Senator Patrick Leahy, was leading the Congressional
resistance to the Patriot Act, the assault on Americans'
privacy and civil liberties justified by "Al
Qaeda's" attack, clearly drafted by the Bush
Administration before 9/11
and "in the can" awaiting its "trigger
event".
And who in the U.S. civilian leadership and military
chain of command are among the prime suspects for these
acts of High Treason?
First and foremost are the signers of the pre-9/11
Project for a New American Century (PNAC) manifesto
calling for "a new Pearl Harbor" to catalyze
its global domination agenda, including Vice President
Dick Cheney; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who
was on the White House Clarke teleconference from the
outset but whom no one could allegedly locate until 10:30
on 9/11; then Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz;
Richard Perle, then head of Secretary Rumsfeld's Defense
Policy Board; Jerry Hauer, just-former top emergency
response official for New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani and
the federal government's top bio-terrorism expert who
personally took anti-anthrax Cipro to the White House on
9/11; then National Security Council Middle East adviser
Zalmay Khalizad, soon to be the first U.S. Ambassador to
Afghanistan after 9/11 and now U.S. Ambassador to
Iraq-the two countries whose invasions were rationalized
as retaliation for the attacks of 9/11 -- during the Cold
War, Khalizad was a liaisonto then CIA "bag
man" Osama bin Laden in the CIA's covert war against
the Soviets in Afghanistan, the crucible from which
al-Qaeda emerged); and Jeb Bush, governor of Florida and
President Bush's brother, who just before 9/11 added
"terrorist attack" to the list of triggers for
declaring martial law in the state, where President Bush
was Sept. 10 and Sept. 11.
Yet another is the U.S. military agency, probably Army or
Joint Special Operations, that preplaced the
military-grade sulfur-enhanced thermite throughout WTC 1,
WTC 2 and WTC 7 well before the 9/11
"terrorist" attacks, with special attention
reserved for Army Gen. William G. (Jerry) Boykin, the
radical Christian fundamentalist former commander of the
Army's elite commando Delta Force, recently proposed to
head the Army's Special Operations Command. Also the
Pentagon's POP2 office, reported to plan and script
"false flag" operations, attacks staged by the
military but made to appear perpetrated by an outside
enemy to justify U.S. military "retaliation".
Yet another suspect is Defense Intelligence Agency Iran
expert Lawrence "Larry" Franklin, on loan to
Perle and Wolfowitz's neo-con cabal partner Douglas Feith
Before and on 9/11 and arrested for passing national
security secretson Iran to Israeli operatives at the
American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Scrutiny should also be given to the scriptwriters for
NORAD's and NRO's emergency response exercises planned
for and held on 9/11, especiallymembers of the drills'
"White Teams" who set the content in advance
and then oversee both "Red Team attackers" and
"Blue Team defenders" on the actual day of the
exercise. (Larry Franklin was also, and may still be, an
officer in the Air Force reserves, whichoversaw the NORAD
"Vigilant Guardian/Vigilant Warrior" wargame
exercises on 9/11). Among these high levelscriptwriters
almost certainly is John
Fulton, head of Strategic Gaming at NRO before and on
9/11 who devised that agency's plane-crashing-into-tower
emergency response drill on the morning of 9/11. Also
every one of the as-yet-to-be-identified "top
Pentagon officials" who on the day before 9/11,
Sept. 10, according to
Newsweek, suddenly cancelled their then-already-booked
flights for Sept. 11(19) --
not coincidentally the same day, Sept. 10, that the NSA
intercepted Atta's "Zero hour is tomorrow" call
with 9/11 'Mastermind' Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. These
"top Pentagon officials" may well include
National Military Command Center (NMCC) commander Brig.
Gen. Montague Winfield who, again on that same day Sept.
10, asked his deputy, Navy Capt. Charles Leidig, to take
over for him just the next morning between 8:30 and 10:30
-- precisely the two hours of Sept. 11 'war
games'.
Yet another key suspect is 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, had represented Egyptian-born U.S. resident
Magdy Elamir, under investigation for illegally diverting
millions of dollars from a medical business and whose
brother, Mohammed Elamir (also spelled El Amir), funded
arms smugglers with links to Al Qaeda.(20)The twoEgyptian brothers El
Amir also figured prominently in a 9/11 precursor
operation, "Operation Diamondback".So is it
only a coincidence that lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed
Atta's name in his native country, also Egypt,was also
Mohammed El Amir? That is, had Chertoff, put in charge of
"investigating" Atta's attack immediately
after, legally represented one of Atta's relatives? After
the attacks, President Bush almost instantly put Chertoff
in chargeof the entire 9/11 "investigation",
and he is now Director of Homeland Security -- the top
official charged with protecting the U.S. mainland from
attacks
by . . . "Al Qaeda".
Another key suspect is Air Force General William Hayden,
before and on 9/11 head of the National Security Agency
(NSA), which tapped the callsof lead hijacker Mohammed
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 the FISA warrants required by law. (Even the
single pre-9/11 Sept. 10 warrantless NSA tap puts the lie
to President Bush's claim that he initiated warrant-less
NSA taps of al-Qaeda suspects because of-that is, only
after-9/11. Hayden was then made deputy director of
Homeland Security, immediately under . . .
Michael Chertoff.
At FBI headquarters are key suspects David Frasca and his
deputy Michael Maltbie, who ignored 70 pleas by Zacarias
Moussaoui's interrogator to aggressively investigate the
contents of Moussaoui's computer before 9/11. And in New
York, there is then New York City Mayor Rudolph
Giulinani, who completelyevacuated WTC 7, where his
Emergency Operations Center was located, when told -
ahead of time - that the WTC was going to come down.
Jerry Hauer, who personally took anti-anthrax Cipro to
the White House on 9/11, had been the head of
Giuliani's emergency responders.
Attention should also be directed to Phillip Zelikow,
before and on 9/11 NSC adviser, along with PNAC manifesto
signer Zalmay Khalizad, to then NSC Adviser Condolezza
Rice. Zelikow orchestratedboth the 9/11 Kean Commission
Report cover up of the Administration's inside job and,
at Rice's request, rewrote the Bush Administration's
official 2002 national strategic plan to match the global
domination agenda of the pre-9/11 PNAC manifesto.
And there is Larry Silverstein, lease holder of the WTC
complex buildings including Towers 1 and 2 brought down
by controlled demolition using pre-placed explosives on
9/11, and outright owner of WTC 7 which also came down by
controlled demolition on 9/11 though not hit by any
plane. Just before 9/11, John O'Neill, who had obviously
pre-alerted Silverstein to the plot to attack both WTC 1
and WTC 2 based on the surveillance from the mid-July
'final 9/11 planning meeting' in Spain, was made chief of
securityfor the WTC just before 9.11, personally arranged
by PNAC manifesto signer Jerry Hauer. Silverstein then
"happened" to try to add a rider to his
insurance policy on the WTC complex so that twin
terrorist attacks would result in a doubled claims pay
out.
And there is the mysterious "Agency" ?
apparently a reference to a U.S. Government agency ?
which the Kean Commission report revealed, without
identifying by name, made 90 percent or so of the
suspicious puts on United and American Airlines, Boeing,
and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter
(which had the largest number of floors in the WTC towers
which collapsed) shortly before 9/11. The most likely
candidate for this "Agency" is the CIA, often
referred to as just "the Agency." By law, it
should be recalled, the CIA is the personal
"agency" of the President. On 9/11, this was
George W. Bush, who said "It looks like I hit the
Trifecta!" Finally, the prime suspect is whoever is
behind the voice that speaks to President Bush through
his wireless ear mike, from whom he visibly takes orders
and receives running commentary. Bush has called the
voice 'God', saying he receives instructions 'directly'
from the Almighty, but it's clearly that of a very human
Controller -- the
ultimate 'Man Behind the Curtain'.
These are just some of the names knitted into the scroll
of the Sept. 11 Truth Revolution.
Barbara Honegger, M.S. is Senior Military Affairs
Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School (1995 -
current), the Navy's advanced science, technology and
national security affairs university. This Appendix, as
all of Honegger's publications on Sept. 11, are solely in
her capacity as a concerned private citizen and do not
imply official endorsement.Honegger served as Special
Assistant to the Assistant to the President and White
House Policy Analyst (1981-83); was the first
public resignation of conscience from the Reagan-Bush Sr.
Administration; was the pioneering Irangate author and
whistleblower on the October Surprise (October Surprise,
Tudor, 1989) and Iran/Contra expose documentary
"Cover-Up"); and was called as a
researcher-witness for both the Oct. 23, 2004, and Aug.
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 9/11 Evidence
Summary and analysis was presented at the L.A. Citizens
Grand Jury hearings and at the 9/11 Emergency Truth
Convergence conference held at American University in
Washington, D.C. in July 2005.
Notes:
1) The clock stopped at the moment the Great Earthquake
hit San Francisco on April 18, 1906 is at http://sfgate.com/greatquake/
.
2) The clock at the Pentagon heliport just outside the
west section, frozen at 9:31:40 a.m. by the 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.
Yet another stopped Pentagon clock is in the Sept. 11
exhibit at the Smithsonian Institution. It was originally
posted at
http://www.americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/record.asp?I-
D=19 .
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, Sept. 12, 2001, 6:15 a.m. 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
somForsvandt" by Danish researcher Henrik Melvang,
available at www.unmask.dk
and at www.bombsinsidewtc.dk
. See also 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.
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
Pentagon
athttp://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
.
7) Pentagon attack Internet eyewitness research
compilation by Peter Pelogitis.
Page 13
8) Pentagon witness Don Perkal to MSNBC: "Even
before stepping outside, I could smell the cordite. I
knewexplosives had gone off somewhere."
9) Interview with former Acting Asst. Secretary of
Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict
(SOLIC), Robert Andrews.
10) Videotaped testimony of William ("Willy")
Rodriquez, former World Trade Center janitor and the last
person to leave the WTC alive on Sept. 11, in the 9/11
documentary "Loose Change", second
edition": "All of a sudden we hear 'Boom!'
inthe 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) saying 'Explosion!'.and he said '(it was from) The
elevators!' And there were many explosions."
11) "Agency (NRO) Planned Exercise on Sept. 11 Built
Around a Plane Crashing into a Building", Associated
Press, Aug. 22, 2002; by Jonathan Lumpkin; "They
Scrambled Jets, but It was a Race They Couldn't
Win", Syracuse (NY) Post-Standard, Jan. 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 (NY)
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-
_timeline&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) Will provide New York Times cite for CIA rendition
flights run out of Portland, Maine.
13) Kean Commission Report(will provide page number).
14) Summary interrogation of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed,
claimed "mastermind" of the Sept. 11 attack
plot, read into the Zacarias Moussaoui sentencing trial
record by the prosecution on Mar. 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, footnote on Eberhart's
testimony(will provide page number).
16) Air War Over America, U.S. Air Force (will provide
full cite and page number); "Civilian Planes to be
Grounded 12 Hours Today in Defense Test", New York
Times, Oct. 14, 1961, pp. 1 and 4; "Civilian Planes
Halted 12 Hours in Defense Test: Joint Maneuvers Fill Air
Over Canada
and U.S. with Military Craft, Cities 'Hit' by
Bombers", New York Times, Oct. 15, 1961, pp. 1 and
46; "Computer is Key to Area Defense: Ever-Alert
Device in (New) Jersey Joins in Air Exercises", New
York Times, Oct. 15, 1961, p. 46; and "U.S.-Canada
Test of Air Defense Rated
a Success: President Receives a Report on Maneuvers,
Search is Pushed for Missing B-52", New York Times,
Oct. 16, 1961, pp. 1 and 16.
17) For example, see "Flight 11: The Twin
Flight", by "Woody Box"
athttp://new.globalfreepress.com/article.pl?sid=04/03/14/212247,
and "Flight 11 and Flight 93 'Survived'" at http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=858.
18) "Moussaoui, Undermining Case, Now Ties Himself
to 9/11 Plot", The New York Times, Mar. 28, 2006,
pp. A1and A14.
19) Newsweek, Sept. 24, 2001.
20) "Michael Chertoff-Where All the Questions Should
Start", Jan. 12, 2005, http://allspinzone.blogspot.com/
September 2006
Why I Won't Apologize for my Essay
"The Myth of the Innocent Civilian"
>From Michael Santomauro
RePorterNoteBook@aol.com
Dear friend,
Here are some of the experiences that motivated me to be
provocative with my essay, "The Myth of the Innocent
Civilian" (essay in the second half of this post)
which under the Patriot Act could put me in jail. Let me
start from the beginning.
I remember on 9/11 being woken-up by phone with my
girlfriend crying and telling me to watch the news
because a plane crashed into the WTC building and then
hung-up. I still laid in bed half asleep for about five
minutes. It was her crying and abrupt hang-up that I
decided to get out of bed and turn on the television set.
Immediately, I'm watching a plane crashing into the
second WTC building, but the anchorwoman confused me,
because she thought she was showing a replay of the first
plane crashing into one of the Towers, not realizing that
it was a live shot of the second plane. I'm seeing one
building on fire and the second building with a plane
crashing into it. As she is showing her confusion on the
airwaves, I decided to switch to CNN, where I'm told the
United States is under attack.
I was just numb.
Later, newsman Dan Rather is interviewing former Clinton
national security advisor Sandy Berger. After the
interview, when Dan Rather thought he was off the air (he
actually was, with no picture on the screen, but the
microphones were still on) he says "Sandy that was
great" and Sandy Berger says back "thanks
Dan," which I thought was odd, considering Dan
Rather's upbeat voice in saying "Sandy that was
great" was so different from his somber voice when
he was asking questions. Within a few seconds you hear a
sad Dan Rather turn into a happy man. 'What was that all
about?', I thought to myself.
After that, I decided to go outside. It's now early
afternoon. I thought it would be a good idea to stack up
for food and water. As I'm in the elevator, a man who
lives in the building steps in - it's just him and me in
total silence. Then he burst into anger "this is
worse than what I saw in Korea. We should kill the
bastards."
I walk the streets and there is a surreal quietness
except for the loudest noise being the footsteps of
thousands of New Yorkers coming back from an early day at
work. Then I walk farther away from my apartment to a
nearby school. I run into students laughing and giggling,
knowing what just happened. I even saw one school teacher
joining in on the laugher. The teacher and all the
students acting that way were all African-American. I was
confused! I was dismayed! I was angry to see such
non-seriousness. It was happening next to a fire station,
and I would glance at the firefighters faces to see their
reaction to the teenagers behavior. They seem to take it
in stride.
I walk to my favorite Pakistani restaurant - it closed
early. I notice all the Muslim owned shops closed-up...
Afraid.
I walk and walk no ones talking - just walking. I could
never forget the loudness of those foot steps.
Just then a woman exits out of an ATM bank. She is in a
panic, crying and comes up to me. In the only speaking
voice on the sidewalk she tells me that someone stole her
cell phone. As I'm about to comfort her, another woman
passing by shouts "shut the fuck-up lady, 10,000
people just got killed. Put things in perspective.
Asshole."
It worked! The woman stopped crying. We looked at each
other. She says to me "that was rude." But I
thought to myself, 'maybe it was rude, but the rude lady
was right'.
I kept walking in silence, thinking to myself this is all
because of our lopsided foreign policy in the Middle
East.
Later, I catch-up with my girlfriend. We find an Indian
restaurant that is open. Actually, all the restaurants
that are non-Muslim owned were open - packed with diners.
The same people that walked in silence on the sidewalks
earlier in the day were acclimating to talking again -
but not talking about why it happened. Instead, some
tourists were upset it was going to interfere with their
vacation stay in New York. My girlfriend was telling me,
that she was not looking forward to the possibility that
this was going to be the sole item of news coverage for
the rest of the month. I was dismayed that she had that
attitude. Others did not have anything to say about what
happened - instead they would small talk about mundane
things, like it was an ordinary evening, as they were
drinking their beer, laughing and being joyous. These
white yuppies and other folks were no different from the
black students I experienced earlier in the day.
Later, about 10 p.m. there was news footage of a
different angle of the second plane hitting the tower. I
turn the volume up and my girlfriend (a Wasp) storms out
of the bedroom screaming that it was too loud and she
needed to sleep. I was pointing to the TV and saying
"look at the new footage they have." She
screams "I don't care!"
I was perplexed. I scream back "how can you even
sleep? Can't you stay up till midnight and watch this
with me?"
She says "no, it's too depressing." My
girlfriend is a doctor - a psychologist!
After that, I get a call from my girlfriend's girlfriend,
Alex.
"Hello"
"Hi, Michael this is Alex. Is Susan there?"
"Amazing what happened today."
"It's old news."
"Old news?"
"I saw the flames from the train as I was going to
work this morning. I knew right away I was going to have
the day off from work. So when I got to work they told us
to go back home. You know what I did instead?"
"What?"
"I decided it would be a perfect shopping day. So I
rush to Bloomingdales and guess what happened?"
"What?"
"They were closed. And so then the trains weren't
running. So I walked all the way down to the village to
Babou's apartment and we hung-out and smoked pot."
A phone call I will always remember verbatim - from a
Jewish woman who claims to have a Mensa IQ. An immigrant
from the former Soviet Union, a rabid Zionist, who chose
to live in the United States over Israel, who at a later
date had no qualms telling me and my girlfriend over
dinner, that she felt superior to us because she was born
Jewish. Sick!
The next day I get a phone call from Israel from an
ex-girlfriend, to see if I'm okay. She went on to tell me
she was depressed about her fellow Israelis. She says
"Israelis are celebrating in a silent way that it
happened to America."
Two days later on Sept. 13, I'm talking to my stockbroker
in person at the bank, he is Italian-American. He is an
apolitical person when it comes to foreign policy issues.
Ignorant of history, but intuitively he senses something
that my ex-Israeli girlfriend was telling me. In
confidence, he tells me that on Tuesday morning on 9/11
when the bank was getting ready to close early his Jewish
clients had happy smirks on their face. Asking me
"what was that all about?
Am I not understanding something?"
The first Monday after 9/11 the major TV networks resume
regular TV programming. (My girlfriend's wish comes
true.) On the David Letterman show, his first guest is
Dan Rather - the same man with the happy voice, saying
"Sandy that was great" is weeping in the
interview chair. He went on to say how he was disturbed
about the "Middle Easterners" who were caught
dancing and celebrating on the George Washington Bridge.
Mr. Rather knew that those arrested "Middle
Easterners" were Israeli nationals.
To this day, most Americans think those "Middle
Easterners" celebrating on the bridge were Muslims
thanks to Dan Rather and the rest of the sanitized US
media outlets, who are afraid of losing their jobs if
they report they were Jewish.
I'll stop here. I can continue into infinity with all the
nuance's of my experience concerning the event of 9/11. I
hope that, what I have imparted to you, is not your
reality. If that is the case I envy you. But, I have not
met a thinking person who has not had at the minimum -
similar experiences or more depressing ones. I stand by
the provocative essay that I wrote (see below) in
September of 2002 a year after the event - even if it
means my arrest under the Patriot Act.
You can yell "fire" in a crowded theater - if
there is a fire. Unless you are a mute, you have a legal
obligation to yell "fire." When is someone
supposed to be provocative? When everyone is dead from
the disease? There is a time and a place to be
provocative - the cancer is growing. The cure? Wake
people up! That is my reality! What's yours?
Something else struck a chord in my mind after I wrote
"The Myth of the Innocent Civilian" that
supports my experience and taught something about myself.
When I had a conversation with a man who worked as a chef
at a restaurant in Manhattan on Nine-eleven, he was also
shocked at how uncontemplative people were on that day.
He went on to tell me that in a quiet moment, in his
kitchen, one of his cooks from Bolivia - pulled him over
and said:
"I don't understand you Americans, if this happened
to my country, we would all be in church praying."
The cook from Bolivia spoke those words the same evening
I was across the street from him in the Indian
restaurant.
Maybe I'm part of the problem.
Maybe I also live the myth.
Peace.
Michael Santomauro
RePorterNoteBook@aol.com
The Myth of the Innocent Civilian
by Michael Santomauro
Sept. 2002*
Who's Kidding Whom?
At least half of those victims who were killed on Sept.
11, 2001 will not be missed, in my way of thinking they
were part of the problem. If the dead are a reflection of
how the living and uncaring American concerns himself
about the Middle East, then maybe the typical American
deserves the same fate.
The majority of those killed on 9/11 thought that the
Muslim world hates the U.S. because of our freedoms -
that the Arabs are a hateful people - that the
Palestinians are in the wrong - and that Israel is right.
Many of the dead, when they were alive spoke in the same
vernacular as their loved ones do today.
"Who gives a fuck about the Palestinians."
"We should just let Israel drop atomic bombs on the
whole region and kill them all."
"There're just sandniggers, who cares about
them."
"God gave the land to the Jews. The bible says
so."
"There're just a bunch of terrorists."
"We should send weapons to Israel, look at what
happened to them with the holocaust."
"If we can't trust them, why should Israel?"
Former Congressman Findley writes:
"Nine-eleven would not have occurred if the U.S.
government had refused to help Israel humiliate and
destroy Palestinian society. Few express this conclusion
publicly, but many believe it is the truth. I believe the
catastrophe could have been prevented if any U.S.
president during the past 35 years had had the courage
and wisdom to suspend all U.S. aid until Israel withdrew
from the
Arab land seized in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war."
Do we really care?
I think if the typical American does not make an attempt
to understand the damage our weapons have inflicted on
the Arabs by proxy with Israel and the continuous
dishonest one-sided United States foreign policy in the
region, then maybe we deserve more of what we got on
Sept. 11, 2001.
Former Congressman Findley continues:
"In its violent assaults on Palestinians, Israel
uses the pretext of eradicating terrorism, but its forces
are actually engaged advancing the territorial expansion
just cited. Under the guise of anti-terrorism, Israeli
forces treat Palestinians worse than cattle. With due
process nowhere to be found, hundreds
are detained for long periods and most are tortured. Some
are assassinated. Homes, orchards, and business places
are destroyed. Entire cities are kept under intermittent
curfew, some confinements lasting for weeks. Injured or
ill Palestinians needing emergency medical care are
routinely held at checkpoints for an hour or more. Many
children are undernourished. The West Bank and Gaza have
become giant concentration camps. None of this could have
occurred without U.S. support. Perhaps Israeli officials
believe life will become so unbearable that most
Palestinians will eventually leave their ancestral
homes."
The arrogance, the callousness was there!
The typical, now dead American from 9/11 lived his life
knowing these facts and not caring about it. The
arrogance and the callousness was part of his everyday
being. Was his life worth living, if he didn't care how
the American government was using his tax money to hurt
people? - to destroy the livelihoods of an entire region?
- to allow American bombs to be used in a criminal way
when dropped by Israel? - Knowing the U.S. veto power
would come to the rescue of Israel, in virtually any UN
resolution that was condemning Israel's crimes against
the Arabs.
My contention is most of those killed on 9/11 were aware
of this.
I think to myself, 'when is America going to stop the
culture of lies'. And then my inner thoughts hear the
callousness of the dead - when they were alive before
9/11, scream - "So what? Who cares? Bomb them
all."
So what?
The myth of the innocent civilian. Who's kidding whom?
Nine-eleven should be a reminder that if more Americans
have an early death, it is because of the end result of
not caring.
Peace.
Michael Santomauro
|