This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Government Officials Say 9/11 Was State-Sponsored Terrorism … But Disagree About WHICH Nation Was Behind Attacks
In December, an American court entered a default judgment against Iran for allegedly having a hand in the September 11th attacks. 1
On the other hand, a 9/11 Commissioner and the Co-Chair of Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 both say in sworn declarations that the Saudi government is linked to the 9/11 attacks. 2
Then again, right after 9/11, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld accused Iraq of having a hand in the attacks.
People may not remember now, but – at the time – the supposed Saddam-9/11 link was at least as important a justification for the Iraq war as the alleged weapons of mass destruction. 3
Of course, the Afghanistan war was largely based upon the allegation that the leaders of that country – the Taliban – had harbored Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda terrorists. In other words, the U.S. government treated Afghanistan as being complicit in 9/11 by giving refuge to the 9/11 attackers. 4
At a minimum, America unintentionally created an atmosphere in which Al Qaeda terrorists could thrive. But numerous former U.S. military and intelligence officers think that rogue elements within the U.S. government intentionally allowed or facilitated the attacks.
A government official told Fox News:
Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.
Israelis were clearly spying on the 9/11 hijackers within America before 9/11. See this, this, this, this and this.
While many people say that Israel only spied on the hijackers – and didn’t withhold actionable intelligence from the U.S. government – others, including some former military officials (like this guy), allege that Israel withheld information from the U.S. or even had a hand in the attacks, pointing to suspicious activities regarding moving vans and explosives on 9/11. See this, this, this, this and this.
What does this mean? We don’t know for sure which nation or nations backed the 9/11 terror attacks.
But as the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee Bob Graham told PBS Newshour in 2001, 9/11 was state-sponsored terrorism, and it is vital for America’s national security that we get to the bottom of who the backing country was (and whether more than one country was involved):
[Question]: Senator Graham, are there elements in this report, which are classified that Americans should know about but can’t?
SEN. BOB GRAHAM: Yes … I was surprised at the evidence that there were foreign governments involved in facilitating the activities of at least some of the terrorists in the United States.
I am stunned that we have not done a better job of pursuing that to determine if other terrorists received similar support and, even more important, if the infrastructure of a foreign government assisting terrorists still exists for the current generation of terrorists who are here planning the next plots.
To me that is an extremely significant issue and most of that information is classified, I think overly-classified. I believe the American people should know the extent of the challenge that we face in terms of foreign government involvement. That would motivate the government to take action.
[Question]: Are you suggesting that you are convinced that there was a state sponsor behind 9/11?
SEN. BOB GRAHAM: I think there is very compelling evidence that at least some of the terrorists were assisted not just in financing — although that was part of it — by a sovereign foreign government and that we have been derelict in our duty to track that down, make the further case, or find the evidence that would indicate that that is not true and we can look for other reasons why the terrorists were able to function so effectively in the United States.
[Question]: Do you think that will ever become public, which countries you’re talking about?
SEN. BOB GRAHAM: It will become public at some point when it’s turned over to the archives, but that’s 20 or 30 years from now. And, we need to have this information now because it’s relevant to the threat that the people of the United States are facing today.
Notes:
1 The 9/11 Commission Report states:
We have found no evidence that Iran or Hezbollah was aware of the planning for what later became the 9/11 attack.
The same lawsuit had previously named Iraq as a culprit, but dismissed Iraq when it became obvious there was no connection (see note 3).
A default judgment – such as the one against Iran – means that the defendant doesn’t appear in court, and so does not present a defense or contrary evidence. The judge instead often accepts virtually whatever the plaintiff claims, without examining or considering any contrary evidence.
2 The 9/11 Commissioner and the Co-Chair of Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 who say that Saudi Arabia is behind the 9/11 attacks are calling for either a “permanent 9/11 commission” or a new 9/11 investigation to get to the bottom of it.
3 This claim that Iraq is linked to 9/11 has since been debunked by the 9/11 Commission, top government officials, and even – long after they alleged such a link – Bush and Cheney themselves.
4 The Taliban allegedly offered to hand over Bin Laden to the U.S., but the U.S. refused the offer, and started bombing instead.
»
- advertisements -
israel
Israel without a doubt and the dual citizen Israelis in our govt. http://www.bollyn.com/public/Solving_9-11_-_The_Deception_That_Changed_T...
"Israel without a doubt and the dual citizen Israelis traitors in our govt" Fixed it for you
The truth can only set you free when you are ready for it and the only time any human soul is ready for it is "at time of death"...
All of the spiritual teachers - from Jesus to Buddha to the yogis - said the trick is to "die while you're alive" ... in other words, be open to truth even when you're fully alive and living a normal life.
Atheists, of course, say now or never ...
"Atheists, of course, say now or never ..."
Replace Atheists with "Global Leaders" and you get the point.
I live the truth daily George and even after fully realizing how bad it is I still believe "living through it" is better than the other option.
Robslob ... I think I understand what you're saying ...
After a while, you can determine the author just from the post title.
the 911 commission report is a farce (of course), as full of erroneous extrapolations as the NIST report on WTC 7
another shoe into the crotch of the official narrative, cheers George
this logistics say it all as well, we had the hardware Ready to Go and we have cabinet members admissions stating the bush admin was prepping for Iraq pre 911 - its clear now to everyone that we went into Afghanistan as a mere flimsy pretext (and now obvious geostrategic rationale)
the PNAC group that helped cook up the narrative pre Powell at the UN with his shitty 3D renderings of mobile weapons labs themselves Called for a "catalyzing event like pearl harbor" in the now famous Rebuilding America's Defenses document and looking back at this origin myth for the open-ended global war on terror that also has us surrendering all civil liberties in order to somehow defend against an unidentifiable enemy who could be hiding under every table, we can see the agenda clearly: ordo ab chao.
Rebuilding America's Defenses.pdf
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf
Whats the consensus this theory;
http://www.septemberclues.info/
with the CGI'ed WTC building and the fake victims? I had never heard of it prior to Friday.
I love Bill Hicks when he talks about JFK - he runs about shouting 'They're lieing to us..!!!'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_XnKjS3oWs
If he was alive to have seen 911 he'd have had a few things to say about that shit.
The 9/11 Commission Report: A 571-Page Lie
by Dr. David Ray Griffin
Sunday, May 22, 2005
In discussing my second 9/11 book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, I have often said, only half in jest, that a better title might have been "a 571-page lie." (Actually, I was saying "a 567-page lie," because I was forgetting to count the four pages of the Preface.) In making this statement, one of my points has been that the entire Report is constructed in support of one big lie: that the official story about 9/11 is true.
Another point, however, is that in the process of telling this overall lie, The 9/11 Commission Report tells many lies about particular issues. This point is implied by my critique's subtitle, "Omissions and Distortions." It might be thought, to be sure, that of the two types of problems signaled by those two terms, only those designated "distortions" can be considered lies.
It is better, however, to understand the two terms as referring to two types of lies: implicit and explicit. We have an explicit lie when the Report claims that the core of each of the Twin Towers consisted of a hollow steel shaft or when it claims that Vice President Cheney did not give the shoot-down order until after 10:10 that morning. But we have an implicit lie when the Commission, in its discussion of the 19 alleged suicide hijackers, omits the fact that at least six of them have credibly been reported to be still alive, or when it fails to mention the fact that Building 7 of the World Trade Center collapsed. Such omissions are implicit lies partly because they show that the Commission did not honor its stated intention "to provide the fullest possible account of the events surrounding 9/11." They are also lies insofar as the Commission could avoid telling an explicit lie about the issue in question only by not mentioning it, which, I believe, was the case in at least most instances.
Given these two types of lies, it might be wondered how many lies are contained in The 9/11 Commission Report. I do not know. But, deciding to see how many lies I had discussed in my book, I found that I had identified over 100 of them.
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20050523112738404
Griffin is one of the best authors around on 911. TY.
I'm pretty open to conspiracy theories, believe western ruling structures are morally bankrupt and all about self-enrichment, and also felt there were a lot of holes in the 911 story.
But this website is pretty convincing regarding the collapse of the towers and WTC7 too. I believe the official story on that now.
http://www.debunking911.com/collapse.htm
As for who backed the hijackers, security oversights, not scrambling planes, relationship with bin Laden family etc., who knows! They sure didn't waste any time putting PNAC into action. But I believe the towers actually did collapse because of failure of support columns and pancaking floors.
GJP, the towers fell at near freefall speed (very close) as if falling into thin air. This is impossible w/out controlled demolition.
Have you looked carefully at the central cores? Learned how they were made? Good site here, but see the central cores under construction--3/4 solid concrete w/47 vertical steel rods going up through them, over four inches thick, each, u-shaped.
No way something like that collapses into its own footprint at freefall speed for any reason other than controlled demolition.
Think again, please.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/core.html
Just physics clash. These buildings have serious mass supported by seriously engineered components. Romans didn't build this tall because they couldn't. What's the trick? High strength materials. What is the rub? Less overall redundancy. How do we compensate? Better math. Does that work? More often than not.
Physics is that for every action, there is an equal but opposite reaction.
Here's the physics. And I'm a liberal arts major. SO WHAT. I can do math. Can you?
http://www.911blimp.net/prf_FreeFallPhysics.shtml
Actually, I am an registered professional structural engineer. So, the answer is yes.
University of Pheonix ?
Registered in Somalia ?
To me the towers look like progressive collapse.
WTC7... I don't know enough on that one to say anything. Will have to read up on that one. But, I am to understand the alledged "contents" of WTC7 were... ummm... important. Which makes one wonder.
WT7 contained all the info on the investigation of the 2 trillion dollar misplacement by the DOD.
On September 10, 2001, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld held a press conference to disclose that over $2,000,000,000,000 in Pentagon funds could not be accounted for. Rumsfeld stated: “According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions.”
I read somewhere that there something else in that building of importance. For the life of me I can't recall, or say that there was any real validity to that claim. The gist of it is that whatever was there was never found.
the enron file??
Aparrently my memory was in there. Damn!
junk me baby! ha ha - liberal arts major, right?
edit: I am a long time ZH dude. No psy-op shit here. This WTC thing is lots of fun - but sad in a way - because I expect this crowd to be a little more intelligent than to tangle with basic physics is such an idiotic manner. But, I will say "fucking kudos" for fight club behavior. Rock on folks. Question everything. Junk me. It is all good. Speak up. Challenge the system. Makes me proud in a scary sort of way. You people frighten me at the same time you make me laugh and think there is hope yet - so confusing in a good sort of way. ha ha.
Then go somewhere and laugh, but STFU on here.
You can't even tell us what all was in B7, but you're laughing at us?
Be proud in fucking silence.
Solid advice there. S'ing the F up and going to bed now! Not laughing at you guys... glad to poking at people who care. Ok, some of it for fun. But mostly because it is worthy of a subject. A pivotal moment in our history.
let's leave the NYC buildings out of it for now. Please explain the stock shorts on leading to a firm connected with an ex CIA, the NORAD response, the multiple coordianted exercises on the same day, the false radar blips (first of its kind) the FBI told to shut down terrorist investigations, the pilot skills and airplane design necessary for those G forces, turns, and strikes, the actual pilot skills of those alleged, how some of them are still alive, the pentagon strike hole and lawn, the mismatch with the flight datat recorders (pentagon) why they can't release one image of the pentagon plane after immediately seizing all the area cameras, Minetta's testimony - do the orders still stand ... just for a few.
Never have heard where all the fucking GOLD went either.
Lots of financial secrets buried in NYC that day. Those who laugh about this do so in ignorance, not strength.
Thank you for playing "Useful Idiot" on this thread.
Without you this ZH program would not be possible.
Please continue your generous support.
I logged in just so I could tell you that you're believing a lie. I'll use 8th grade physics to prove it to you, ready?
Think of a car crash - two objects colliding. Both objects do two things, every single time, they 1.) slow down and 2.) absorb energy/damage. On 9/11, if you remove all of the bullshit of planes, jet fuel, terrorists, weakened steel, etc., you still have two objects: a top block of concrete and a bottom block of concrete. When the top block falls directly onto the top of the bottom block, it does not 1.) slow down or 2.) absorb energy. This is, of course, impossible in a natural collapse. Falling straight down through the path of greatest resistance? That would be like one of the cars in a car accident exploding into dust, while your car remains unharmed. It just doesn't happen. Ever.
And let's talk about the dust...you know, that giant moving cloud of concrete. That's called a pyroclastic density flow, and it happens when heavy dense particles are suspended in a gas, and the only time it happens in nature is during a volcanic eruption. It does NOT happen when one concrete block falls onto another concrete block. Think about hitting a concrete block with a sledgehammer...does the concrete vanish into a cloud of dust? No. Because the amount of force needed to pulverize the concrete into a dust cloud (in the case of 9/11, this happened in midair) is orders of magnitude above what can be exerted by a simple collision. If we're talking simple physics, than what would have happened on 9/11 would be for the top section to collapse onto the bottom section, stop, then lean to one side and fall down to the street.
This is just simple physics, without all of the bullshit. And regardless of who you believe, Ike Newton and simple physics will kick the government's ass every single time.
Nice post Killtruck and you're right, it's just physics.
One of my favorite arguments surounds the fact that the buildings were designed to survive impacts with Boeing 707s. Why no lawsuits surrounding negligent design, hmmm?
The impact of those planes was much larger than a 707. Is actually pretty amazing how much damage those building took and still stood up for as long as they did. Plus, it is really difficult to model such events.... even harder back when those designs were done.
Actually, NO, not MUCH larger. NOT.
Look at the sizes and weights.
So, was it kinetic energy of the impact or heat from the fuel? The 707 holds between 16,060 and 23,820 gallons of fuel depending on the varient, the 767-200 holds 16,700 gallons. The largest varient of the 767 holds 24,100 gallons - so pretty much a wash in terms of the fuel load.
Combination of factors I would think. Thermal changes combined with structural damage that effectively overloads remaining columns at the same time increasing thier effective unbraced length. Sagging floors (and sections of floors) producing catenary effects. All sorts of potential ugliness going on in a situation like that.
The real rub here in saying the core should have held up better is playing out that scenerio. It would suggest the core was blown up at various levels all the way down during the collapse in a controlled manner. I call bullshit on that one. Wouldn't the impact have been ever more if the buildings fell on NY like trees?
edit: saying a building is safe from an impact of a 707 is sort of bullshit anyhow. Too much uncertainty. The truth would be that the building is "some percent" reliable to not collapse under said scenerio. Even then the "said percent" would be somewhat bullshit (10 different engineers would give 10 different answers).
A combination of factors would make more sense - except the official explaination makes little mention of structural damage. It focuses on the weakened trusses from heating.
FYI - here's a statement from one of the building's designers: http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930227&slug=1...
Apparently they did think of the fuel - and I guarentee you they knew enough about structures and engineering to anticipate materials heating from the fire.
Alot of the basic information is crap for sure.
What people don't appreciate is the complexity of such a situation and dynamics that play out in a collapse. Really tall buildings are more a sum of the parts than lower rise stuff. These things got hit at a level which left enough mass above to pile drive the rest.
God bless. I hope we one day find out who really did this. Everyone involved.
9/11 was a tough day for me. While the towers were falling, I was in a doctor's office with my daughter being diagnosed with a seizure disorder. My world was collapsing at the same rate as the towers at the same moment.
So don't leave everyone on ZH hanging.
What did the doctor say?
Did he tell you that you have a brain disorder?
I wish. Then maybe I could get some cool pills or something.
After all medications failed and my daughter was spiraling out of control, my wife offered something daring as an idea... the ketogenic diet. At this point we had already been told my daughter would be crippled and would have to wear a helmet for life - probably would be retarded - etc. She was having hundreds of small seizures each day.
We went out of pocket from an insurance standpoint and went to Hopkins who pioneered this diet idea. We put everything into this and it worked. Three-plus years later, my daugther was seizure free, medicine free, etc. She just started high-school this year - is an honor student and plays inthe drum line in the band. Is a real amazing story that I am happy to share.
Seriously, I think we all agree that something is wrong about 9/11. My first reaction when I saw it was that it seemed too controlled. I still hold that thought in my mind. The physics I try to seperate because that is the carrot at the end of the stick it seems they want us to chase. The collapse behavior is plausible. Effort needs to be focused on the "who," not the "how".
(gave you plus one for asking - with feeling - lol)
The attacks of September 11, 2001, were accomplished through an amazing orchestration of logistics and personnel. Crossing the Rubicon discovers and identifies key suspects—finding some of them in the highest echelons of American government—by showing how they acted in concert to guarantee that the attacks produced the desired result.
Crossing the Rubicon is unique not only for its case-breaking examination of 9/11, but for the breadth and depth of its world picture—an interdisciplinary analysis of petroleum, geopolitics, narcotraffic, intelligence and militarism—without which 9/11 cannot be understood.
http://www.amazon.com/Crossing-Rubicon-Decline-American-Empire/dp/086571...
Read it and weep.
Who?
Let's start with Cheney.
Only the peak oil thing and the crying--I don't know. Is oil even a "fossil fuel?" Probably not.
Dude - that's fucked up.
Is ok. I like the rough stuff. ha ha
9/11Truth Is the LitmusTest
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AVY-iQDO8pg
Actually, I make no claim that there wasn't any funny business. In fact, I don't know much about WTC7, so I won't comment there. What I am saying is quite simply that the collapse behavior of the towers was plausible as a progressive collapse. That's it. Just physics (not the hillbilly 8th grade stuff mentioned in this thread).
edit: adding that the "uncertainty" thing is for real... structural engineering is probabalistic in nature. Not absolute. So, where's the BS?
They will not be dissuaded centerline...no matter how many dead end alleys they turn down, theres another one just around the corner to investigate...lol.
One of the real tragedies of the whole thing is, all the dead end alley's promoted as fact, even as the event recedes into the distance. If I were actually trying to hide something I would toss one thing out there after another...Mossad suicide pilots...voice recognition software (to get around dead eyewitness' saying what was really happening)...remote controlled planes...nano thermite wired to the exact floor that was hit...its a very long list.
I'm not saying its wrong to seek truth, I'm saying some truths are self evident and whatever truth 911 truthers are trying to discover got/gets drowned out by complete idiots pointing to yet another dead end.
I'm out of this thing, junk away moonbats, you know who you are ;-)
"...wired to the exact floor that was hit."
You are like a doggie with a bone with this one point.
Each charge would have contained a separate, radio-controlled detonator assigned to a series of radio repeater clusters. No need for wires these days. And it's all software-driven, which would allow for last-minute changes to the demolition sequences.
Time to strike this one from your little list of truth-evading talking points, idiot.
Ha ha. Like that degree of accuracy is probably. Get real. You have seen too many mission impossible movies. Do you have any clue the real physics and timing involved? How ridiculous it is to assume one could cripple the top portion and perfectly time the implosion of the base? With two towers? Hit with different degrees of damage? You are brain damaged and focusing on the shit you don't get which distracts from the shit you do get (that something is wrong about all this).
But, point taken on tech. Get's scarier each day.