Comment on this article |
Email this article |
"Shorthand for Unspeakable Truth"
by Jeremy Baker
Email: web_wender (nospam) hotmail.com
20 Jan 2004
Modified: 02:45:32 AM
WTC controller Larry Silverstein refers to "pulling" WTC 7 on 9/11. Demo worker in same program uses "pull" to mean demolition. Video of both comments are posted on the web.
“Shorthand for Unspeakable Truth”
Disturbing Questions Surrounding the Collapse of World Trade Center 6 and 7
by Jeremy Baker
copyright June, 2003 by Darkprints
"...I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire...and I said, 'Well, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life...maybe the smartest thing to do is, is 'pull' it...and they made that decision to 'pull'...uh, and we watched the building collapse."
Larry Silverstein- commenting on the “collapse” of WTC 7 during an interview on “America Rebuilds,” a PBS documentary
The irony is that I’ve always hated brain teasers. I’ve always been poor at puzzle solving and arithmetic. And chess, well, let’s not open old wounds shall we. Truth is, these kinds of things, they just annoy me. But, luckily, these skills aren’t required when casting an inquisitive eye on 9/11. All you need is an outstanding grasp of the bloody obvious.
I may not be Hercule Poirot but I’ll tell you right now, nothing felt right to me about that day. Living on the west coast I didn’t tune in until well after the towers had fallen. But in the days and weeks that followed the tapes rolled on and on, and we relived those potent moments over and over again, the surreal images almost dreamlike in our minds. I must confess I felt many different things about what I’d seen. Lots of conflicting things. Horror, fear, rage. I felt excitement, as well (now don’t lie, you felt it too), as though something cathartic had happened in a world that often seems despairingly mired in convention and routine. And I did, I felt very conflicted. And I’ve felt that way ever since.
I remember, that day, discussing the attacks with a friend at the coffee shop where we sat watching non-stop TV coverage of the unthinkable. I even began to write it down, (I’m not kidding) a list of all the handy ways this horrendous event could be just the tonic for W and his crowd. The nation’s economic woes (like the ones that doomed his daddy) would surely become, in comparison, just an irritating foot-note. And the impending round of military mania would do much to restore the sense of meaning and purpose robbed us that summer by “evil” statesman Gary Condit, and all those circling sharks who had finally decided, after all these years, to organize and strike back en masse against their age old, but rather bony nemesis, homo-sapien (if they’d attacked the summer after 9/11 you can bet Richard Perle would have called them terrorists).
Each night we were told what was what by Tom, Dan and Peter. We listened to press conferences and speeches from the Pentagon and the Whitehouse in Washington. The tidal wave of history raged foreward, and in our collective, post-traumatic stupor, the blasphemous idea of pausing, taking a deep breath and carefully assessing of what had befallen us seemed almost a vulgarity, like a belch during a funeral. After all it was so simple. Someone “evil” had hit us, right? And now we have to hit them back. C’mon, it’s the American way. It’s football in autumn. The home team or the visitors. U.S. versus them. Don’t bother me with the details.
But when JFK was shot it wasn’t so simple. It was one complex, mind-blowing, government sponsored scam. And you’d have thought we’d have learned. You’d have thought we would’ve taken something valuable away from that revealing time. But the same guys who pulled the triggers then still run the show now, wiser in their ways, more stealthy. And soon it may again become necessary for us to face another round of the incomprehensible and acknowlege the grim truth behind good Mr.Vidal’s sage observation that, in these outrageous times “...this ‘conspiracy stuff’ has become shorthand for unspeakable truth.”
As of this time the avant garde in “enlightened skepticism” is primarily a web based effort, and for good reason. When GE, one of the world’s largest weapons manufacturers has, as its own private PR firm, an entire television network, (NBC and affiliates) you damn well better find some other venue than mainstream TV to gather data and compare notes. The internet, of course, is that venue and it’s proven to be, quite simply, the most potent weapon ever invented in the struggle against corporate and governmental tyranny.
Now I’d be the first to cast doubt on any scrambled, poorly sourced effort to prove or disprove a highly sanctioned point of view. I need facts, and lots of them, if I’m going to sign on to anything new. But what we discover when examining the mega-crime of 9/11 is not just one or two seemingly incongruous details or the odd neglected point of interest. What we see instead is a deluge of outrageous inconsistencies throughout all quarters of the “official” 9/11 investigation, literally a mountain of glaring discrepancies that all require a serious explanation.
Regrettably I can only deal with one relatively small part of the puzzle here, namely, the strange circumstances surrounding the “collapse” of WTC 7. But outrageous irregularities exist regarding many other areas of the “official” 9/11 investigation as well, including;
-the disturbing manipulation of passenger manifests and take-off times.
-blatant, shocking questions concerning the flight 77 Pentagon crash site.
-stunning revelations about our near total lack of military response to the attacks.
-the long list of detailed warnings U.S. intelligence received from many global sources alluding to an imminent terrorist attack.
-CIA and FBI agents being stone-walled in their pre- and post-9/11 investigations into the “attacks.”
-eyewitness testimony being suppressed or ignored.
-the almost complete press blackout of the ubiquitous Mossad (Israeli intelligence) presence within the U.S. before and after 9/11.
-suspicious trading in United and American airline stock before and after the attacks.
Before I embarked upon my cyber-sleuthing there were two points in particular that struck me as being obvious clues that things weren’t what they seemed. First and foremost was the curious and appalling lack of defensive response from the most formidable military the world has ever known (the planes were in the air for nearly two hours and not even an escort was scrambled. PGA golfer Payne Stewart’s doomed flight was intercepted 15 minutes after the FAA reported it being in trouble). And secondly, the strange way the buildings fell. The way they just crumbled into dust, like a cartoon in which something’s blown to smithereens, falls in a tidy heap, and then gets swept up and tossed in the ash can. Surely a professional team of demolition experts couldn’t have done a better job (we’ll get to that later).
The “official” version of events concerning the “collapse” of the WTC complex buildings 6 and 7 is as follows. As the north tower, WTC 1, crumbled and fell debris from the 110 story, steel-framed sky-scraper landed heavily on top of WTC 4, 5 and 6, damaging them beyond repair. The Marriot Vista hotel was also completely destroyed by falling pieces of concrete and steel. WTC 7 was damaged so badly that the rain of debris ignited an inferno so intense that it too collapsed as heat buckled the structures main supports. WTC 7 however, didn’t collapse until later in the day (approximately 5 o’clock PM).
The north tower had been struck by AA Flight11, a Boeing 767 passenger liner which was presumably hijacked by Arab terrorists. The south tower as well was hit by UA Flight 175 shortly thereafter, also as a result of a suicide hijacking. The towers burned for awhile until internal temperatures reached a point where the buildings structural integrity was compromised and failure of the support columns occurred.
This is the “official” version, the one we’ve heard again and again in the newspapers and on TV. Those “Arab bastards.” But there are those who speculate that this scenario is simply not feasible given a diligent perusal of the facts. And I, for one, believe every single word.
A theory has developed among a disparate group of both seasoned professionals and unofficial observers that, as shocking as it may seem, the towers may have been previously rigged with explosives, a plan designed to complete the job that the “hijacked” planes had begun. The firey wrecks of the passenger jets would merely serve as a plausible pretext for the subsequent collapses. The total destruction of the WTC would be the crowning touch on a “psyop” (psychological operation) of unimaginable proportions. A massive, murderous plot specifically fashioned to be absolutely beyond belief and, of course, one that would help to steer public opinion towards the support of pre-existing corporate objectives in Central Asia and the Mideast. And the more spectacular the “op” the better. It was Hitler who said that people will more likely believe a big lie than a small one.
And it wasn’t just a bunch of computer-ninjas who came up with the pre-planted explosives thing. The Albuquerque Journal reported that Van Romero, (a demolition expert and VP for Research at the NM Institute of Mining and Technology, the very place where the first people on the WTC disaster scene were trained), reviewed available video tape and offered this intriguing perspective; “My opinion is...that after the airplanes hit the WTC there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse.” Mr. Romero, a man often called upon to conduct forensic investigations of catastrophic bombings and fires, also mentioned that in terrorist attacks there is frequently an initial event that gets things rolling, followed by a secondary event that wraps things up.
But as fate would have it he shared these learned observations on a trip to Washington DC where he and Tech’s VP for Administration and finance Denny Peterson, discussed defense-funded research with DOD big-wigs. How odd that he later recanted his position. I guess that when you’re surrounded by wolves it’s best not to go “baaah!”
But one man who did raise the alarm was Bill Manning, editor of the 125-year-old Fire Engineering Magazine (probably just another pinko rag), a monthly which often publishes technical studies of major fires. In the January issue last year he called for a “full throttle, fully resourced” investigation into the collapse of the WTC. He also branded the current “official” investigation “a half-baked farce.” But what would you expect from an outfit staffed by such beatniks as the FDNY’s chief structural expert deputy chief Raymond Downy (deceased as of 9/11) or FE’s technical editor Professor Glenn Corbett, a fire engineering expert at John Jay College.
Mr. Romero’s initial assessment of the demise of WTC 1 and 2 radically bolsters the impression had by many that the towers seemed to disintegrate in a very neat and tidy fashion. And, lest we forget, they did it to us once before, in 1993, remember? In fact some of them were even caught early in the day on 9/11, driving around in a white van, laughing and celebrating as the towers burned and Americans died. And they were disguised as furniture movers too. That must be how they got in to rig the bombs. Damn you, you evil Arab terrorists!
It all sounded so neat and simple. The authorities had come through and important answers had been provided. Their conclusions were clear, unambiguous and, most importantly, palatable. But before you get too comfortable in your smug, post-9/11, red, white and blue, ideological easy chair, let’s go over a few of the more salient facts about that day. Strap your hats on, this road gets a little bumpy.
For starters no inferno has ever resulted in the collapse of a steel-frame high-rise. Not one. Ever. On 9/11 three steel framed high-rises (two of which were specifically designed to withstand the impact of the jets that hit them) crumbled to the ground, supposedly due to fire weakening the structure. And oddly, the first tower to be hit (a direct hit with all of the planes fuel injected squarely into the structure) was the last one to fall. Most of the fuel in the jet that hit the south tower was primarily consumed in the dramatic external fireball at impact. And yet its fire was the more structurally compromising.
And why did Flight 175 take such a circuitous route and then hang a U-turn to approach from the south? Why not just plow into the building and be through with it? And why stay in the air so long? It gave the inevitable fighter response way more time to scramble and get you before you achieve the objective. Why not just take off, break out the box cutters (in a jet with several dozen people, all with carry on luggage, brief cases, etc. that could be used as potential weapons) and get the job done? Why not take off from LaGuardia or JFK? What’s the matter with these guys?
When I first started looking into this stuff I was very much on guard for red herrings and tall tales. Just because this case is obviously such a shameless charade doesn’t mean that there aren’t a bunch of wackaloons out there trying to become the next “Wood-Stein”. So when I down-loaded a video of flight 175 slamming into WTC 2 and exploding in a jarring visual of fire and steel, I was naturally skeptical about the streaking “thing” I saw in the sky a few seconds after impact. [see the video at; http://www.geocities.com/streakingobject/foxvideogo.html ]
The blurb said “look for the streaking thing,” so I did. But it was so fast I had to go frame by frame to finally catch it. But there it was. Too fast and slender for an F-16. It’s trajectory, northward and straight down, was such that it was possible to momentarily confuse it with plane wreckage falling to earth. But it wasn’t smoldering wreckage. No doubt about it. It was definately something else.
Now I’m fully aware that, especially in this digital-day, video can be easily doctored. So I took a few deep breaths, watched the video a few more times, absorbed its awesome implications (if it was a fake it was one hell of a fake) and stowed it away for future reference. Even I’ve been having trouble swallowing some of this stuff. But there was no way to doctor what came next.
I’d been a big fan of Fintun Dunne’s web-treatise “The Split-Second Error: The Blockbuster” [http://www.serendipity.li/wot/psyopnews1.htm] for quite awhile and after several readings, I finally made the connection. What you never hear about in the news is the stunning fact that seconds after the impact of Flight 175 into the south tower there was a massive ground level explosion in the vicinity of WTC 6! In their essay Dunne and his assistant, Kathy McMahon, include a still image of a CNN video that clearly shows a large cloud rising fast, (550 feet into the air, higher even than WTC 7) a huge “event” occurring close to the ground with the towers still standing tall in the background! The videos of Flight 175 and it’s fireball were certainly dramatic, but there’s no way those bits of firey debris streaking to the ground could possibly have touched off such a dynamic explosion.
A link below the still frame of the explosion promised a video of the CNN coverage showing a cloud of smoke rising high and fast into the air. So, with sticky palms and a lump in my throat, I clicked. But instead of a video confirming the worst, I got what would turn into a long series of “This page can no longer be displayed” prompts that I would encounter in my web-wendings.
There’s nothing quite like the chill you get from being up at 2:00 AM, feverishly searching and sleuthing, and just when you’re on the brink of a breakthrough, promising links that could tie up loose ends one way or another, instead, over and over again, end up with “this page can no longer be displayed.” The links are there, but not the web pages (the original site for “The Split Second Error...” disappeared mysteriously from the web on October 21st 2001. Most of the critical links on the present site have been disabled). You’d think that after the crime of all crimes was committed you’d be able, for example, to find plenty of aerial photos of, say, the Pentagon crash site moments after impact, or the Flight 93 crater in Pennsylvania caused by its “plunge to earth.”
But give it a shot. I can remember seeing some pictures of the Flight 93 crash site a long time ago, but the best you can find today are low angle, very distant shots of some field somewhere, usually with a handful of “workers” (dressed in chemical suits straight out of the X-files), mostly taken weeks or months after impact. And the pictures that I most remember were always conspicuously lacking in wreckage, a problem shared by the Pentagon crash site as well. Almost 100 tons of fuselage, engines, seats, wings, tail sections and landing gear struck the Pentagon (at a 45 degree angle!) and yet there appears to be very little discernable wreckage.
But I digress. The landsat photo of the wreckage of the WTC on the web (included later in Dunne and McMahon’s treatise) is still there for all to see, and it’s a photo that must be seen to be believed. Forget about missile-like objects streaking through the sky as though flung by Apollo. Never mind picture stills of a huge explosion and promising, but deleted, video links. If that’s still not enough to pique your interest then let me ask you this. What’s that huge crater in the top of WTC 6 doing there?
Now I could maybe hear you argue that this neat round crater is a result of the rubble raining down from above, but this explanation opens up a whole new can of worms, chiefly that the footprint of the damage would seem to indicate that the vast majority of the debris impacted WTC 6 and fell short of building “7.” But CNN stills of a massive explosion over WTC 6 before the towers fell? With the truly compelling video version conveniently deleted? And another non-deleted video of a missile-like object streaking from the heavens towards that exact spot? Sorry, but I’m not going to be able to keep that incredulous look off my face for long.
And that’s just building 6. WTC 7 has a pedigree that makes “6" look like the son at the seminary. But let me pause first and introduce Larry Silverstein, the new top-hat at ground zero. Seven weeks before 9/11 Mr. Silverstein celebrated the signing of a 99 year lease for the entire WTC complex (the first time control of the WTC had changed hands in thirty years.), a $3.2 billion sweetheart deal that would put him in charge of what was then a thriving New York City landmark. He also wisely beefed up the insurance on the complex...a smart move by a shrewd real estate developer with apparently impeccable foresight.
The first in a series of peculiar facts and figures concerning the demise of building “7" is that, well, it really isn’t particularly close to its nemesis, tower 1. As a matter of fact it’s not even across the street from tower 1. Unbelievably it’s completely on the opposite side of WTC 6 from the crumbling north tower! Richard Tomasetti, of Thornton/ Tomasetti Engineers, a company involved in the WTC clean-up effort observed (in the aforementioned PBS documentary); “Most of the debris that damaged the other buildings was pretty much contained within about a block or so off the main plaza of the WTC.” But despite this astute assertion, building 7 was apparently damaged so severely that it caught fire, burnt for 7 hours and then just fell in another curiously even, very complete and inferno related collapse (once again, the third of 3 such unprecedented failures that day!).
But let’s go to the landsat aerial image again. Look to the north of the building with the huge crater in it (!). See the space on the opposite side of WTC 6 from the high-rise that allegedly destroyed it? That’s where the 47 floor Soloman Brothers building (or “7") once stood. Right there, in that completely leveled lot. WTC 6, a much smaller building directly beneath tower 1 is still standing, battered but proud, even with its insides torn out like and old hobo’s molar.
The NY Times reported that the cause of the collapse was similiar to that which destroyed the Murrah building in OK City. Something called a bridge-beam, used in both structures, had apparently failed, contributing to the collapse. But the similarities don’t end there. Like the Murrah building WTC 7 housed high level federal offices...CIA, FBI, Secret Service too. It’s also the storage center for millions of files containing information about active cases involving organized crime, international drug dealing and money laundering (oh, and terrorism too). In addition WTC 6 was known as The Customs House Building, and was the home of The Customs Service, the Departments of Commerce, Agriculture and Labor, and, yet another Murrah building tenant, The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
But apparently Rudy Giuliani also had an unnatural attraction to WTC 7. Specifically it was the site of his own personal $15.1 million bomb and fire proof bunker, a doomsday operations center that the NY Times described as being “...bullet proofed, hardened to withstand bombs and hurricanes.” Part of this shrewd plan included the storage of 42,000 gallons of deisel fuel to power his emergency control apparatus in the event of a total infrastructure breakdown (the FDNY and NYPD allegedly warned him repeatedly that the fuel storage was dangerous and illegal).
Now all of the above should be enough to make anyone’s eyebrows sore. But in this sordid drama it just never stops. It turns out that the Mayor and his staff (who, incidentially, closed lower Manhattan below Canal St. at roughly 11:00AM) evacuated a building adjacent to the towers at 75 Barkley St. just before they fell, later telling Peter Jennings, “...we were told that the WTC was gonna collapse,” information that flies in the face of a NY Times article in August 2002 describing FDNY fire fighters on the 78th floor of the south tower (minutes before the collapse) reportedly feeling confident about controlling the fires and evacuating people. How could Rudy Giuliani have known that the towers were about to fall? Especially when there’s absolutely no precedent for a collapse under those circumstances?
And I still don’t understand how falling debris could have set “7” on fire. A clock radio fell on my head when I was 12 and I didn’t catch on fire. There’s no mention anywhere of The Marriot Vista Hotel or WTC 4, 5 and 6 catching on fire, even though they were directly under the towers (and even after a huge explosion tore out the center of “6"). And not only was “7” bravely shielded from the chaos by “6" but Rudy Giuliani had apparently just turned “7" into an Armageddon bunker, reinforced all around to withstand terrorist attacks, hurricanes and Lizzie Grubman. Okay, okay, it may’ve had “a little gasoline” stored inside, but that was near ground level of the 47 story, Arab-proof, steel-belted edifice and was presumably contained within a somewhat well armored tank of some kind. How could it have been ignited?
Another thing that bothers me to no end, all this fire. It just doesn’t make sense. The heap of rubble that was formerly WTC 1 and 2 burned for two months after the attacks! Why? “Officially” it was due to jet fuel and smouldering pieces of carpet and other office stuff. “Experts” have also theorized that the tons of paper we saw fall like snow from the towers probably had a lot to do with it too (c’mon!). But other experts indicate that most of the jet fuel was probably consumed minutes after the impacts of the planes. Makes sense. And certainly the fires in the towers were comparatively modest in size compared to the vastness of the debris. Wouldn’t the fires have been dispersed as the towers fell (in the same way you might kick a smoldering campfire and scatter the ashes?) and been subsequently smothered by tons of pulverized concrete and steel?
There are some who speculate that the long lasting and intense fires in the debris may have been the result of massive underground explosions (possibly low-yield nukes), a primary factor in the towers controlled demolition. 32 kilometers away, at the Lamont-Doherty Seismic Observatory, massive "events of short duration," appearing as dramatic spikes on a seismograph, were recorded immediately prior to the collapse of each tower. These spikes are more indicative of explosions than they are of the low rumble of a prolonged collapse. Eyewitnesses (including firefighters) report hearing powerful explosions just before the towers fell, and other reports describe pools of molten steel apparently discovered during the cleanup effort.
But what really puzzles me is this pesky “official” version of events. Don’t forget, it’s always been held as scripture that WTC 7 collapsed due to fire. In another NY Times article Dr. John Osteraas, a respected civil engineer who reviewed tapes of the collapse said,“the pieces have come together. Without the fuel, I think the building would have done fine.” I feel better already. Even the “expert” said so. In a preliminary report in March of 2002 (7 months after the attacks!) a team of engineers organized by FEMA and the American Society of Civil Engineers concluded the same thing; fire melts building. Case closed. Go home to your families brave men.
But then one night in March 2003 I’m watching a PBS program called “America Rebuilds; aYear at Ground Zero” (originally broadcast September of 2002). It was of course typical PBS, very slick and professional, scripted narration, excellent graphics. I didn’t think anything of it when Kevin Spacey mentioned towards the beginning that “WTC 4, 5 and 6 were left standing but were damaged beyond repair. WTC 7 fell after burning for 7 hours.” Why would I? It’s been the party line all along. I didn’t notice either when, later on, a worker commented “...well, we’re getting ready to “pull” building 6," moments before demolishing its gutted carcass. But when Larry Silverstein was featured later in the broadcast and said the following, my ears perked right up;
"...I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire...and I said, 'Well, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life...maybe the smartest thing to do is, is 'pull' it...and they made that decision to 'pull'...uh, and we watched the building [WTC 7] collapse."
Well! This is a rather startling revelation. It leads one, of course, to speculate on several fronts. First off , which is it guys!? Did the damn thing melt and collapse or was it “pulled”! Are you honestly saying that Larry Silverstein and the FDNY decided to “pull” building 7, kept their little secret all those months while FEMA and its team of civil engineers conducted an official and extensive investigation, and then, months after the study’s completed, Loose-Tongue Larry and NY’s finest all of a sudden announce, “oh, we’re sorry, did we forget to mention it was us?” And Mr. Silverstein, if you and the FDNY did “pull” WTC 7 why would Kevin Spacey (and the rest of the world and national media) say that it “fell after burning...”? Wouldn’t he have said something like “WTC 7 was determined to be unstable and the decision was made to bring it down”? What the hell is going on here?
As if all this weren’t crazy enough don’t overlook the chief point here. In light of this new data from Mr. Silverstein, this “crazy” idea of pre-installed explosives all of a sudden becomes quite a bit, well, less crazy! The only thing I can come up with in Larry’s defense is that he and the FDNY did some kind of quickie demolition job, tossed some kind of devices inside the building (which, according to Hoyle, was buried under tons of rubble and burning so badly that it was in danger of collapse), and then “pulled.” Maybe this is something that big city fire people do on occasion, but if it is it’s definately a cover story for Fire Engineering monthly!
Which leaves the only other explanation I can come up with. And that’s that WTC 7 was pre-wired to explode in a professionally executed controlled demolition, a concept that is at the heart of the “unofficial” version of events most commonly supported by the present crop of internet investigators and those theorists who believe that there’s quite a bit more more to the story of 9/11 than what we’ve been told.
If the attacks happened to have been an inside job (there, I said it) Mr. Silverstein’s reference to “pulling” WTC 7 is one big, fat, shining star stuck to the foreheads of the pro-explosives people and provides an exponential boost in creedance to those theorists who believe that the WTC towers may as well have been rigged with explosives prior to the attacks of 9/11. And most disturbingly, it supports the idea of non-Arab involvment in a “black op” of biblical proportions.
Incredibly, this is just one of many areas of doubt relating to the “official” story, the one we’ve had spoon-fed to us by every sector of the government and media concerning the events of September 11th. Nit-pick these troublesome speculations if you like, but there’s a mountain of incongruencies in all areas of the 9/11 attack investigation which can simply no longer be ignored.
And certainly the idea that our lads in D.C. can be trusted to investigate themselves is historically a ludicrous assumption. The Warren commission was comprised of at least two of JFK’s bitterest antagonists, and we all know how well that turned out. Incredibly, the present “official” investigation was originally headed up by Henry Kissinger, a man who’s often thought of as being one of the most shameless propagandists of our time and who this writer considers the Hermann Goebbels of our hemisphere. We all want to believe that our government can be trusted to do what’s right, but consider this. It wasn’t congress who spearheaded the Watergate investigation. It was two inspired journalists whose tireless efforts forced congressional action.
The plausible perpetrators of a scheme of this magnitude are few. And the evidence, when taken as a whole, implicates Arab terrorists least of all. They are unlikely to have ever pulled off a plan that required so much insider string pulling. And, when investigating a crime, the issue of motive is always a high priority. So, who is it that’s sitting pretty after all the dust has settled and the wreckage’s been conveniently and rapidly recycled? (compliments of Mr. Giuliani and Co.)
Certainly not the Arabs. Whatever image our media has conjured for them, they certainly aren’t a stupid people (especially the ones we are presently asked to credit with pulling off such a complex and audacious crime). There’s no way they would not have expected a massive military retaliation, a response that would never have been considered equitable in their struggle for sovereignty. And lest we forget, Osama Bin Laden specifically denied responsibility for the attacks (despite what you think you’ve seen in the suspiciously convenient videos that’ve popped up just when needed most). His official statement came on September 28th, in Ummat, a Pakistani paper;
“...I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States...I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act...The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; to the people who want to make the present century a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity...This [ American] system is totally in [the] control of the Jews, whose first priority is Israel, not the United States.”
Now, has the media image generated of OBL been one of a man who would deny responsibility for such a successful “op”? Everything we’ve been told about him would indicate that he is wholely and openly committed to his bitter anti-Americanism. Once again it just doesn’t add up. So who else? Who else would benefit from such a horrendous crime? Who indeed.
Various theories have included several different possibilities. Remember that little list my friend and I jotted down in the coffee shop? Well, there’s no question that the attacks of 9/11 have seriously lubricated the oil soaked Bush administration’s pre-orchestrated advance into the oil fields of Central Asia and Iraq. For years a consortium of U.S. oil companies have dealt directly with the Taliban (Remember? The axis of evil guys?) in talks intended to procure the rights to build a pipeline through Afghanistan, investing billions in the negotiations alone. Just weeks before 9/11 all those years of costly finagling came to nothing when the Taliban, suspicious of the consortiums terms, backed out of the deal, leaving one U.S. diplomat so irate that he threatened “either accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we will bury you under a carpet of bombs.” [“Bin Laden, the Forbidden Truth”]
There were as well formidable domestic woes that a handy “Attack on America” (and subsequent massive military response) would do much to smooth over. All indications were that the economy was in bigger trouble than it had been in a long time (worse even than we were made to believe) in the weeks before 9/11, problems which have already been eased by immense military spending during our bludgeoning of Afghanistan, and now Iraq.
Whether or not all this could’ve inspired a cadre within the Bush administration (CIA, NSA, Defense Department, etc.) to plan and execute the unthinkable, or, to a lesser extent, allow a well known, pre-existing terrorist plot to be aided and abetted is unclear. What is clear is that the Bush administration had a tremendous amount of intelligence from many sources (not just that one famous fax from the Phoenix flight school) that not only was a terrorist attack of major proportions on American soil imminent, but that hijackers using planes as guided missiles was an increasingly plausible scenario. Incompetence on the part of U.S. intelligence operatives as an excuse is bad enough, but it’s better, in a pinch, than admitting the attacks were allowed to happen so you can build pipelines, sell missiles and raise poll percentages.
And please, don’t give me that “how could you think such a thing” stuff. The crimes this government and its global death squad, the CIA, have perpetuated on the world since the end of WWII, are, without exaggeration, some of the worst atrocities ever perpetuated on the human race. And usually these crimes have been directly related to enforcing the economic strangle-hold of western investment in typically defenseless third world countries, operations that often result in the GEs and Haliburtons of the world making billions or so in the process.
The Shah of Iran, Augusto Pinochet, Manuel Noriega, Ferdinand Marcos, death squads in El Salvador, covert, illegal, drug-funded wars in Central America, the debacle of Vietnam and Cambodia, years of support for apartheid in South Africa, complicity in the genocide in East Timor, and the rise and fall of Saddam Hussein...these (and many more) are all examples of CIA handiwork (only the good old U.S. of A. could sell itself as the “liberators” of Iraq instead of it’s tormentors). There’s no ruthless despot, no sleazy “op,” no murderous coup, no disreputable subversion that this country hasn’t sponsored and supported, using tax-payers dollars (often supplemented, incredibly, by millions of dollars of money gleaned from cocaine and heroin trafficking). It’s a bitter pill for many Americans to swallow but, simply put, the U.S. doesn’t stand up for democracy. The U.S. targets democracy, and has done so for decades.
As shocking as it may seem our government attacking its own citizens is not without precedent. The sinking of the U.S.S Maine in Havana harbor in 1898 (which took the lives of 267 sailors and ignited the Spanish/American war) is commonly thought to have been an inside job. Operation Northwoods, an unimplemented plan to frame Cuba for the bombings, hijackings and assassinations of Americans by operatives within the Defense Department became known to all when documents describing the plan were declassified. The idea of government complicity in the attacks of 9/11, whether by active involvment or criminal negligence, shouldn’t come as too much of a shock to any educated person.
The other potentially major player in this whole ugly mess is Israel. There’s nothing more dangerous, no plague more lethal than the specter of religious fanaticism, in whatever form it takes. The Jews of the world are a fine, proud people with a rich and ancient heritage. A fact that makes it all the more important for them to do whatever’s in their power to rein in their rabid, obsessive leadership (as we Americans should). And, in the spirit of a formal investigative process, including, as it should, a clear acknowledgment of motive, it can’t be denied that no one group stands to gain more from the villification of Arabs than those who actively (and covertly) support the ruthless agenda of fanatical Zionism.
The brutality and duplicity of radical Zionism is a matter of history, and its crimes are similar in magnitude (if not in quantity) to the CIA’s. Israeli intelligence, the Mossad (whose motto is “by way of deception, thou shalt wage war”), has a long history of framing Arabs by attacking Americans, the British and even their fellow Jews! [Don’t miss Albert Pastore’s stunning essay “Stranger than Fiction,” a painstakingly researched essay on the history of modern Zionism]
Examples of Mossad attempts to sic American military might on the Arabs are plentiful, well documented and have typically been quite successful. But not always. Attacks that Israeli spies, dressed as Arabs, made on American and British installations in Cairo in 1957 failed when a bomb went off prematurely, causing a scandal, The Lavon Affair, that almost brought down the Israeli government.
The 1967 attack by Israeli torpedo boats and fighter planes on the U.S.S. Liberty (a well marked, unarmed communications vessel) during the six day war established a new and disturbing precedent. Not only did Americans again come under attack by Israelis but this time air support that might’ve saved lives on the stricken vessel was ordered to stand down by high ranking officials in the U.S. military! (ostensibly to save the Israelis from the embarrassment of their mistake!) 37 Americans died in that strike before the attackers withdrew. (The issue of U.S. fighters being ordered to stand down on 9/11 is central to the suspicions some theorists have concerning the near total lack of defensive response to the errant jets, known by the FAA to have been hijacked, hurtling towards their respective targets on that shameful day.) Incredibly, 35 years later, congress is re-examining that attack after being pressured by high-ranking naval officers seeking justice for their murdered men that day.
In the attack on the U.S.S Liberty we observe for the first time U.S. military and governmental complicity in attacks on Americans by Israelis! (a moving example of Judeo /Christian unity) And it only stands to reason that for every one “op” that gets botched and exposed many, many others are presumably quite successful. Given this history of Zionist Tom-foolery who knows how many of the suicide bombings in Israel have been real and how many have been deceitful, manufactured ploys designed by Israeli intelligence to arouse global condemnation of the Palestinians.
Other examples of Zionist and Mossad shenanigans;
-(1946) Irgun terrorists (a Zionist terror group led by Menachem Begin), dressed as Arabs, murder 91 people, including 15 innocent Jews, when they blow up the King David hotel in Jerusalem. Most of the dead were British, who, until then, were instrumental in the creation of Israel and the protection of Israelis. Shortly therafter the British withdrew from Israel.
-(1982) Then Defense Minister Ariel Sharon presides over the Sabra and Shatila massacre in Lebanon that results in the deaths of 2,750 (according to the Red Cross) unarmed Palestinian civilians. Survivors reported that many of the women were raped and murdered. Israelis themselves force his resignation. In 2000 he is elected Prime Minister of Israel.
-(1985) Super-spy Jonathan Pollard is finally arrested after spying for Israel for years. The Israeli government stubbornly denied involvement but, years later, recanted.
-(1990) Victor Ostrovsky defects from the Mossad and writes a book exposing the inner workings of the Israeli secret service. In “By Way of Deception” he talks openly about Mossad frame up jobs (“false flag” operations) that implicate Arabs in terrorist attacks. He explains in detail how the Mossad broadcasted false radio transmissions from Libya outlining pending terrorist activities. This “op” results in Ronald Reagan’s subsequent bombing of Libya.
-(1993) The San Francisco and Los Angeles offices of the Anti-Defamation League (a de facto Zionist propaganda machine and smear group) are raided by the FBI who find detailed dossiers on more than 10,000 American citizens, most of which had been illegally obtained. Roy Bullock, a high ranking Mossad spy, was exposed as well.
-(1994) Dr. Baruch Goldstein guns down 29 muslims in a crowded mosque and wounds many more. This act makes him a hero among many Zionist Jews and his gravesite becomes a shrine!
-(2001) Shortly before 9/11 Israeli intelligence approached U.S. officials with information that the U.S. was about to be attacked by Arab terrorists. They also warned of an Arab spy network running amok in the U.S. In the year following 9/11 approximately 200 Israeli spies were arrested in the U.S., often posing as art students and furniture movers! Many of them were ex-military and trained in electronics and explosives. Many failed lie detector tests and were questioned in connection with the 9/11 attacks! This is the largest spy-ring ever uncovered on American soil! Despite sweeping arrests and detentions few if any Al-Qaeda operatives have ever been charged with espionage.
- (2001) An Israeli government run company, Zim Navigational, the 9th largest shipping company in the world (with 200 workers) moves out of its WTC offices one week before 9/11! [http://www.bible-light.com/JPM/2001-10.htm]
-(2001) Not one Israeli national dies in the collapse of the WTC buildings [NY Times, Sept. 22, 2001](two Israelis allegedly died in the planes, one in each), despite approximately 4,000 frantic calls from concerned families and friends.
-(2001) On 9/11, when asked what the attacks would mean for Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu said “It’s very good...well, its not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy (for Israel).”
-(October 2001) Two Israeli agents are apprehended by Mexican police. They had infiltrated the Mexican Parliament building with a high-powered hand gun, 9 hand grenades and C-4 explosives. They also had fake Pakistani passports. They were detained and then quietly released a few days later!
-(December 2002) Ariel Sharon announces that Al- Qaeda operatives are active in Israel. But an Australian newspaper confirmed that they were, in reality, Palestinian traitors recruited by Israel to impersonate Bin Laden operatives!
And Loose-Tongue Larry Silverstein, the man who celebrated leasing the WTC seven weeks before 9/11? The man who can “pull” tall buildings in a single, well, uh, pull? The former president of the United Jewish Appeal (and owner of the infamous Queens nightclub “Runway 69" which has been tied to heroin, money laundering and police corruption)? The international businessman with vast influence over politicians and government bureaucrats as well as strong ties to the Israeli government and financial communities?
Well, thanks to his remarkable foresight in beefing up the insurance on his new lower Manhattan aquisition he’s now the proud beneficiary of a of $7.2 billion settlement, (now under dispute) more than twice the value of the original lease contract! (not bad for a few months of paper pushing) And, with mayor Bloomberg’s help, new investors are going to foot the bill for reconstruction on the WTC site, [The National Journal] leaving Lucky Larry to kick up his heels with his new windfall. Good to see that after all the hubbub old Larry’s landed on his feet.
Some have doubted anyone could be so careless as to ever make such statements on the record. But consider this. Since 9/11 Bush has twice mentioned in speeches that he watched flight 11 hit the north tower before going into the classroom that morning. This is, of course, stunning considering the only known footage of that event (the fireman’s video) couldn’t have been available until hours later at the soonest (some say the next day). In an interview in Parade magazine Donald Rumsfeld specifically referred to “the missile” that hit the Pentagon, a comment that supports the theory that a missile may have been partly or wholly involved in that attack. (Slip of the tongue? You’re damn right it was!) And the lengthy list of shocking things Ariel Sharon has said on the record over the years hardly need to be listed here.
It’s like what Deepthroat said to Bob Woodward; “Truth is these aren’t very bright guys and things got out of hand.” You’re telling me.
Oh, and remember the “evil” Arabs I mentioned who were celebrating as the towers fell and Americans died? The ones in the white van, dressed up as furniture movers? Well shoot, turns out those cheerful chaps weren’t Arabs at all. They were Israeli spies, arrested on suspicion of trying to blow up the GW bridge on 9/11! (The Jerusalem Post reported that “terrorists” had been arrested in a white van packed with explosives on the approach ramp to the George Washington bridge.) They also had box cutters, foreign passports and $4700. rolled up in a sock. Dominik Suter, their boss at “Urban Moving Systems” and another Mossad operative, soon fled to Israel and several months later they were all quietly deported! J. Baker
For an audio version of Mr. Silverstein’s comments go to;
http://VestigialConscience.com/PullIt.mp3For an audio version of the demo worker using the term “pull” go to;
Copyright by the author. All rights reserved.