Friday, September 11, 2009

Don’t Just Remember 9/11… Uncover It

I remember discussing the events of 9/11 a few months after it happened with an acquaintance of mine who, at the time, would have been labeled as a “conspiracy theory” nut case.

I was polite while listening to him tell me that 9/11 was an inside job by our own government to dupe the American public into willingly allowing further erosion of our civil liberties in the pursuit of “terrorists” and to rally public sentiment to support an expansion of our military presence in the Middle East through invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

At the time, I thought he was delusional. I could not imagine our own government would do anything so nefarious to the American citizenry.

Well, as more and more scientific evidence continues to pile up, as more experts release their opinions, and as more and more very credible people who were in the buildings when it happened come forward to tell their stories about what they saw and heard before, during, and after the planes struck the Twin Towers, the more it appears that the entire truth of what happened on 9/11 has yet to be told.

Now, a very professional and credible documentary has been produced in Europe. It uncovers facts not previously released in the American mainstream media or mentioned in the “official” government investigation of 9/11.

On this the anniversary of 9/11, we should honor those who died by taking a real, hard look at what happened. Ask yourself what YOU believe is the truth. I’m interested to know what you think.

Here it is…

Please forward this blog to everyone you know — as I’m sure you will agree that EVERY American needs to see this.


Informant says FBI threw away chance to catch alleged 9/11 plotter

A Lebanon-native who pretended to be an Islamic extremist at the behest of American authorities claims that the FBI took him off the trail of alleged 9/11 plotter Mohammed Atta right as a window of opportunity opened to catch him.

Were it not for the FBI’s action, the informant says he is “one million percent positive” the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks could have been prevented.

The claims are part of an ABC News report, set to air on Thursday’s editions of World News Tonight and Nightline.

An advance story published on ABC’s Web site notes:

    [36-year-old Elie] Assaad, who posed as ‘Mohammed’ – a personal representative of Osama bin Laden, says he’s a “million percent positive” the 9/11 attacks could have been stopped if the FBI had gone after Atta and Shukrujumah. But because Atta and his men were suspicious of the FBI undercover operative, and secretive, Assaad says his FBI agent handlers sent him after the easier target – two wannabe terrorists whose cases were easy to crack and who were both eventually convicted and sent to prison.

    “I was right, I was a hundred percent right,” Assaad says of his suspicions. He says that when he learned that Atta was one of the 9/11 hijackers, when the FBI asked if he could identify any of the attackers, he was “very upset, angry” and cried.

The network also notes criticism of Assaad by defense attorneys for men who they say he entrapped.

But the informant dismisses the knocks to his credibility. “When you are working undercover, your job is to lie,” he told ABC.

This video is from ABC’s Nightline, broadcast Sept. 10, 2009


Fifty questions on 9/11

It's September 11 all over again - eight years on. The George W Bush administration is out. The "global war on terror" is still on, renamed "overseas contingency operations" by the Barack Obama administration. Obama's "new strategy" - a war escalation - is in play in AfPak. Osama bin Laden may be dead or not. "Al-Qaeda" remains a catch-all ghost entity. September 11 - the neo-cons' "new Pearl Harbor" - remains the darkest jigsaw puzzle of the young 21st century.

It's useless to expect US corporate media and the ruling elites' political operatives to call for a true, in-depth investigation into the attacks on the US on September 11, 2001. Whitewash has been the norm. But even establishment highlight Dr Zbig "Grand Chessboard" Brzezinski, a former national security advisor, has admitted to the US Senate that the post-9/11 "war on terror" is a "mythical historical narrative".

The following questions, some multi-part - and most totally ignored by the 9/11 Commission - are just the tip of the immense 9/11 iceberg. A hat tip goes to the indefatigable work of;; architects and engineers for 9/11 truth; the Italian documentary Zero: an investigation into 9/11; and Asia Times Online readers' e-mails.

None of these questions has been convincingly answered - according to the official narrative. It's up to US civil society to keep up the pressure. Eight years after the fact, one fundamental conclusion is imperative. The official narrative edifice of 9/11 is simply not acceptable.

Fifty questions

1) How come dead or not dead Osama bin Laden has not been formally indicted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as responsible for 9/11? Is it because the US government - as acknowledged by the FBI itself - has not produced a single conclusive piece of evidence?

2) How could all the alleged 19 razor-blade box cutter-equipped Muslim perpetrators have been identified in less than 72 hours - without even a crime scene investigation?

3) How come none of the 19's names appeared on the passenger lists released the same day by both United Airlines and American Airlines?

4) How come eight names on the "original" FBI list happened to be found alive and living in different countries?

5) Why would pious jihadi Mohammed Atta leave a how-to-fly video manual, a uniform and his last will inside his bag knowing he was on a suicide mission?

6) Why did Mohammed Atta study flight simulation at Opa Locka, a hub of no less than six US Navy training bases?

7) How could Mohammed Atta's passport have been magically found buried among the Word Trade Center (WTC)'s debris when not a single flight recorder was found?

8) Who is in the possession of the "disappeared" eight indestructible black boxes on those four flights?

9) Considering multiple international red alerts about a possible terrorist attack inside the US - including former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice's infamous August 6, 2001, memo - how come four hijacked planes deviating from their computerized flight paths and disappearing from radar are allowed to fly around US airspace for more than an hour and a half - not to mention disabling all the elaborate Pentagon's defense systems in the process?

10) Why the secretary of the US Air Force James Roche did not try to intercept both planes hitting the WTC (only seven minutes away from McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey) as well as the Pentagon (only 10 minutes away from McGuire)? Roche had no less than 75 minutes to respond to the plane hitting the Pentagon.
11) Why did George W Bush continue to recite "My Pet Goat" in his Florida school and was not instantly absconded by the secret service?

12) How could Bush have seen the first plane crashing on WTC live - as he admitted? Did he have previous knowledge - or is he psychic?

13) Bush said that he and Andrew Card initially thought the first hit on the WTC was an accident with a small plane. How is that possible when the FAA as well as NORAD already knew this was about a hijacked plane?

14) What are the odds of transponders in four different planes be turned off almost simultaneously, in the same geographical area, very close to the nation's seat of power in Washington, and no one scrambles to contact the Pentagon or the media?

15) Could defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld explain why initial media reports said that there were no fighter jets available at Andrews Air Force Base and then change the reports that there were, but not on high alert?

16) Why was the DC Air National Guard in Washington AWOL on 9/11?

17) Why did combat jet fighters of the 305th Air Wing, McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey not intercept the second hijacked plane hitting the WTC, when they could have done it within seven minutes?

18) Why did none of the combat jet fighters of the 459th Aircraft Squadron at Andrews Air Force Base intercept the plane that hit the Pentagon, only 16 kilometers away? And since we're at it, why the Pentagon did not release the full video of the hit?

19) A number of very experienced airline pilots - including US ally Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, a former fighter jet pilot - revealed that, well, only crack pilots could have performed such complex maneuvers on the hijacked jets, while others insisted they could only have been accomplished by remote control. Is it remotely believable that the hijackers were up to the task?

20) How come a substantial number of witnesses did swear seeing and hearing multiple explosions in both towers of the WTC?

21) How come a substantial number of reputed architects and engineers are adamant that the official narrative simply does not explain the largest structural collapse in recorded history (the Twin Towers) as well as the collapse of WTC building 7, which was not even hit by a jet?

22) According to Frank de Martini, WTC's construction manager, "We designed the building to resist the impact of one or more jetliners." The second plane nearly missed tower 1; most of the fuel burned in an explosion outside the tower. Yet this tower collapsed first, long before tower 2 that was "perforated" by the first hit. Jet fuel burned up fast - and by far did not reach the 2000-degree heat necessary to hurt the six tubular steel columns in the center of the tower - designed specifically to keep the towers from collapsing even if hit by a Boeing 707. A Boeing 707 used to carry more fuel than the Boeing 757 and Boeing 767 that actually hit the towers.

23) Why did Mayor Rudolph Giuliani instantly authorized the shipment of WTC rubble to China and India for recycling?

24) Why was metallic debris found no less than 13 kilometers from the crash site of the plane that went down in Pennsylvania? Was the plane in fact shot down - under vice president Dick Cheney's orders?

25) The Pipelineistan question. What did US ambassador Wendy Chamberlain talk about over the phone on October 10, 2001, with the oil minister of Pakistan? Was it to tell him that the 1990s-planned Unocal gas pipeline project, TAP (Turkmenistan/Afghanistan/ Pakistan), abandoned because of Taliban demands on transit fees, was now back in business? (Two months later, an agreement to build the pipeline was signed between the leaders of the three countries).

26) What is former Unocal lobbyist and former Bush pet Afghan Zalmay Khalilzad up to in Afghanistan?

27) How come former Pakistani foreign minister Niaz Niak said in mid-July 2001 that the US had already decided to strike against Osama bin Laden and the Taliban by October? The topic was discussed secretly at the July Group of Eight summit in Genoa, Italy, according to Pakistani diplomats.

28) How come US ambassador to Yemen Barbara Bodine told FBI agent John O'Neill in July 2001 to stop investigating al-Qaeda's financial operations - with O'Neill instantly moved to a security job at the WTC, where he died on 9/11?

29) Considering the very intimate relationship between the Taliban and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), and the ISI and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), is Bin Laden alive, dead or still a valuable asset of the ISI, the CIA or both?

30) Was Bin Laden admitted at the American hospital in Dubai in the United Arab Emirates on July 4, 2001, after flying from Quetta, Pakistan, and staying for treatment until July 11?

31) Did the Bin Laden group build the caves of Tora Bora in close cooperation with the CIA during the 1980s' anti-Soviet jihad?

32) How come General Tommy Franks knew for sure that Bin Laden was hiding in Tora Bora in late November 2001?

33) Why did president Bill Clinton abort a hit on Bin Laden in October 1999? Why did then-Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf abort a covert ops in the same date? And why did Musharraf do the same thing again in August 2001?

34) Why did George W Bush dissolve the Bin Laden Task Force nine months before 9/11?

35) How come the (fake) Bin Laden home video - in which he "confesses" to being the perpetrator of 9/11 - released by the US on December 13, 2001, was found only two weeks after it was produced (on November 9); was it really found in Jalalabad (considering Northern Alliance and US troops had not even arrived there at the time); by whom; and how come the Pentagon was forced to release a new translation after the first (botched) one?

36) Why was ISI chief Lieutenant General Mahmud Ahmad abruptly "retired" on October 8, 2001, the day the US started bombing Afghanistan?

37) What was Ahmad up to in Washington exactly on the week of 9/11 (he arrived on September 4)? On the morning of 9/11, Ahmad was having breakfast on Capitol Hill with Bob Graham and Porter Goss, both later part of the 9/11 Commission, which simply refused to investigate two of its members. Ahmad had breakfast with Richard Armitage of the State Department on September 12 and 13 (when Pakistan negotiated its "cooperation" with the "war on terror") and met all the CIA and Pentagon top brass. On September 13, Musharraf announced he would send Ahmad to Afghanistan to demand to the Taliban the extradition of Bin Laden.
38) Who inside the ISI transferred US$100,000 to Mohammed Atta in the summer of 2001 - under orders of Ahmad himself, as Indian intelligence insists? Was it really ISI asset Omar Sheikh, Bin Laden's information technology specialist who later organized the slaying of American journalist Daniel Pearl in Karachi? So was the ISI directly linked to 9/11?

39) Did the FBI investigate the two shady characters who met Mohammed Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi in Harry's Bar at the Helmsley Hotel in New York City on September 8, 2001?

40) What did director of Asian affairs at the State Department Christina Rocca and the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan Abdul Salam Zaeef discuss in their meeting in Islamabad in August 2001?

41) Did Washington know in advance that an "al-Qaeda" connection would kill Afghan nationalist commander Ahmad Shah Massoud, aka "The Lion of the Panjshir", only two days before 9/11? Massoud was fighting the Taliban and al-Qaeda - helped by Russia and Iran. According to the Northern Alliance, Massoud was killed by an ISI-Taliban-al Qaeda axis. If still alive, he would never have allowed the US to rig a loya jirga (grand council) in Afghanistan and install a puppet, former CIA asset Hamid Karzai, as leader of the country.

42) Why did it take no less than four months before the name of Ramzi Binalshibh surfaced in the 9/11 context, considering the Yemeni was a roommate of Mohammed Atta in his apartment cell in Hamburg?

43) Is pathetic shoe-bomber Richard Reid an ISI asset?

44) Did then-Russian president Vladimir Putin and Russian intelligence tell the CIA in 2001 that 25 terrorist pilots had been training for suicide missions?

45) When did the head of German intelligence, August Hanning, tell the CIA that terrorists were "planning to hijack commercial aircraft?"

46) When did Egyptian President Mubarak tell the CIA about an attack on the US with an "airplane stuffed with explosives?"

47) When did Israel's Mossad director Efraim Halevy tell the CIA about a possible attack on the US by "200 terrorists?"

48) Were the Taliban aware of the warning by a Bush administration official as early as February 2001 - "Either you accept our offer of a carpet of gold, or we bury you under a carpet of bombs?"

49) Has Northrop-Grumman used Global Hawk technology - which allows to remotely control unmanned planes - in the war in Afghanistan since October 2001? Did it install Global Hawk in a commercial plane? Is Global Hawk available at all for commercial planes?

50) Would Cheney stand up and volunteer the detailed timeline of what he was really up to during the whole day on 9/11?


9/11 Truth Signatories Stand By Call For New Investigation

Despite a concerted effort on behalf of the establishment media to portray 9/11 truth as a taboo subject in light of the resignation of Van Jones, a investigation has found that the vast majority of original signatories to a petition calling for a new investigation into the events of 9/11 stand by their word.

Polls have consistently shown that a significant majority of Americans question the official 9/11 story and those concerns are shared by thousands of military leaders, current and former government officials, intelligence professionals, legal scholars, as well as scores of architects, scientists and engineers.

However, the fact that Van Jones recanted his support for a new investigation and was subsequently forced to resign enabled the media to manufacture a contrived perception that merely doubting the official story in any way was an embarrassing faux pas worthy of public ostracization.

In reality, as America marks the eighth anniversary since the tragic events of that day, support for 9/11 truth is as strong as ever and it’s firmly back at the forefront of public attention following Charlie Sheen’s letter and video message to Barack Obama demanding unanswered questions about the attacks be addressed.

“Salon contacted nearly 30 of the petition’s signatories to see if they felt, as did Lerner, Zinn and Jones, that the document didn’t reflect their views on 9/11. We asked a simple question: If you had to do it all over again, would you still sign the statement?”

“Salon has not heard back from two of the statement’s most famous signatories: actor Ed Asner and comedian Janeane Garofalo. (Editor’s Note: We will update this story if they respond.) But many did respond and most — though not all — expressed their full-fledged support for the petition,” according to the report.

The article quotes people such as Gray Brechin, historical geographer and visiting scholar at the University of California at Berkeley’s Department of Geography, who slams the chilling atmosphere that the establishment has attempted to generate around the subject.

“Have you contacted the widows and other family members who lost loved ones on that terrible day and asked them if they recant wondering why, for example, New York City and the Pentagon — the fucking Pentagon! — were defenseless on that morning more than a month after the would-be president was informed that Osama bin Laden was determined to attack the United States?” asks Brechin. “Have you asked them if they are as disloyal, or as nuts, as Van Jones for signing that petition? Have you an answer for that and other questions on that petition, which were never discussed by the mainstream media when it piled on Jones at (Glenn) Beck’s behest?”

Richard Falk, professor emeritus of international law and practice at Princeton University, told Salon that he would happily sign the petition again, stating, “Citizens in a democratic society deserve to know the truth, and to seek the truth in matters of such fundamental national importance should be treated as an expression of patriotic duty rather than the reverse.”

Mark Crispin Miller, professor of media studies at New York University, also restated his support for the petition, noting that the questions it contained have still not been answered to this day.

“First of all, the statement asks for a new inquiry into 9/11. That is hardly an insane demand, considering the many obstacles and limitations that prevented the 9/11 Commission from doing a proper job,” said Miller. “That body was deliberately enfeebled by Bush/Cheney: grossly underfunded ($3 million — while, for example, the budget for the study of the Challenger disaster was $50 million, and Whitewater cost over $40 million); granted no subpoena power; forced to rush the process; denied all sorts of vital information; and otherwise slowed down, fouled up, kept in the dark.”

“Witnesses employed by the USG were daunted openly by departmental colleagues who sat in on the hearings, ostentatiously, as “minders.” (”The Commission feels unanimously,” said Chairman Thomas Kean, “that it’s some intimidation to have somebody sitting behind you all the time who you either work with or works with your agency.”) And Bush/Cheney themselves refused to testify except in tandem, with a strict limit on their time, and their testimony given off the record and not under oath,” adds Miller.

“So how could anyone regard that body’s findings as definitive — even if those findings were not rife with logical and physical impossibilities, as well as glaring omissions?”

Miller concludes by saying that instead of vilifying “9/11 truthers,” the press should actually start examining the evidence itself.

Douglas Sturm, professor emeritus of religion and political science, Bucknell University, is another distinguished individual who stands by his support for a new investigation into 9/11.

“In direct response to your query, I in no way repudiate my action signing the 9/11 statement. It stands as an appeal to investigate closely and carefully a series of questions about that tragic event that have yet to receive fully satisfactory answers,” he told Salon.

Burns H. Weston, professor emeritus, University of Iowa law school, echoed similar sentiments, stating, “Yes, I would do it all over again. It is my position that too many critical questions have not yet been officially answered, if even investigated, and that, therefore, the jury is still out on the complete truth of 9/11.”


Russia Today: “Stop the 9-11 cover-up”

American citizens are pounding the streets, still searching for answers because the official version of the 9/11events has failed to satisfy many people, and there are calls for a fresh investigation into the tragedy.

The push for another investigation into the 9/11 attacks grows larger with each passing year, particularly today when the US is commemorating the eighth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, which claimed almost three thousand lives.

Manuel Badillo’s uncle died when the Twin Towers came down. He believes the US leaders had prior knowledge of the impending attacks but consciously failed to act.

He asks, “Why was there no justice yet? Why is there no accountability?”

Badillo is among roughly 80,000 New Yorkers petitioning for a new, impartial, probe to answer the questions many believe state and federal officials are failing to address.

Manuel Badillo says, “The majority of family members do not believe the story. First responders do not believe what they were told by the government. All of this turned out to be lies, what we have been told. 60% of the commissioners do not believe the story they received.”

Critics say the 9/11 Commission Report, presented as the official version of events, failed to hold a single individual accountable for the numerous warnings leading up to, on and after September 11.

The NYC Coalition of Accountability Now (CAN) is an organization that is focused on getting a referendum during this November’s mayoral election, to allow New Yorkers the chance to vote for a new 9/11 investigation.

“It’s absolutely essential for the world, for the well-being of the world, that we understand why 9/11 occurred; who was behind it,” says Ted Walter, executive director of CAN. “Because if we have a false understanding, we’re going to be basing policies on that false understanding.”

Pressure’s even coming from the west coast – Hollywood actor Charlie Sheen has written a 15-page public letter to the president calling for another 9/11 inquiry.

But a move like Sheen’s can be quite a gamble in the domain of American public opinion. Just ask Van Jones, Obama’s former ‘green jobs tsar’. He stepped down because of hysteria over his support for and association with 9/11 truth-finders.

“Van Jones should have stuck to his feelings and to his democratic actions that he took, and his intuition, because the majority of Americans, the majority of New Yorkers, all the polls show it, know the government did not tell us the entire story about 9/11,” says Manuel Badillo.

Eight years ago all New Yorkers were standing shoulder-to-shoulder on the day nearly three thousand people perished from terrorist attacks. Now the citizens are standing on one side, police officers on the other, and many are asking for accountability, a demand from which these Americans refuse to back off.


Thursday, September 10, 2009

Charlie Sheen Demands Obama Reopen 9/11 Investigation In Video Message

Actor Charlie Sheen has followed up on his “20 Minutes With The President” letter by directly addressing President Obama in a You Tube clip to request he use his executive power to reopen the investigation into 9/11 and its aftermath.

On Tuesday, Sheen published a fictional account of a meeting with the President on radio talk show host Alex Jones’ and Prison websites in which Obama was confronted about what Sheen alleges is a cover-up surrounding 9/11. In his letter, Sheen requests a real meeting with Barack Obama.

Now Sheen has taken his challenge a step further by appearing in a You Tube video that asks Obama to “be on the right side of history” by reopening an investigation into 9/11, while highlighting that the majority of the 9/11 Commission members have publicly dismissed the official government version of the attacks as a deception, with former Senator and Commission member Max Cleland labeling the government response to the Commission’s questions as “disgusting” and “a scam”.

Sheen highlights several issues in the video, including the unexplained collapse of WTC 7, a 47-story building that was not hit by a plane yet collapsed in free fall fashion into its own footprint within 7 seconds later in the afternoon on September 11. He also cites multiple reports from firefighters, police, first responders and others who were at ground zero and who all described explosions before the collapse of the twin towers and Building 7.

He also discusses how former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds broke her gag order to go public with the revelation that Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda were working with the U.S. government right up until the day of 9/11.

Sheen also demands to know why NORAD’s standard operating procedure was not followed on 9/11, allowing the hijacked jetliners to find their targets, asking, “Where were the planes?”

Sheen expresses his hope that President Obama has read his letter, adding, “We have questions Mr. President, lots of questions….people of the United States and the world demand the truth sir,” adding that Obama has the power and the responsibility to initiate “a truly independent Congressional investigation into the events of 9/11 as well as its aftermath.”

“We want our country back Mr. President, therefore I’m not just calling on you I’m calling on your team, I’m calling on each and every American citizen to wake up, stand up, and demand the truth,” states Sheen in the video.


Tuesday, September 8, 2009

9/11 Training Exercise Planned for Simulated Plane Crash Five Minutes before Pentagon Attack Took Place

Five minutes before the Pentagon was hit on September 11, 2001, a training exercise being run by a US intelligence agency just over 20 miles from the Pentagon was set to include the scenario of a small private jet plane crashing into a building. It is unclear whether the scenario was played out, or if the exercise had been called off by that time.

Important details of the exercise, which was being conducted by the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) at its headquarters in Chantilly, Virginia, are revealed in a document obtained by the 9/11 Commission. The document, titled “Early Morning Flight Activity September 11, 2001,” was part of a series of 9/11 Commission records moved to the US National Archives at the start of this year. It was found there, and posted online, by History Commons contributor paxvector.

Exercise Observers Meet at 9:00 a.m.

The NRO exercise, which had been planned for several months, was set to commence at 9:00 a.m. on September 11, when its observers would meet to be briefed. The observers and exercise role players were to move to their positions for the exercise 10 or 15 minutes later. In the exercise scenario, a Learjet 35A with two pilots and four passengers on board would take off at 9:30 a.m. from Washington Dulles International Airport. This airport, which is located four miles from the NRO headquarters, is where American Airlines Flight 77–the plane that reportedly hit the Pentagon–took off from earlier that morning.

About a minute after the Learjet took off, an explosion would be heard, and the pilot would complain that one of the engines was on fire and he was losing altitude. Around 9:32 a.m., the plane would crash into tower 4 at the NRO headquarters. Since the Pentagon was hit at 9:37 a.m., this means the crash in the scenario was scheduled to occur just five minutes before the actual attack occurred at the Pentagon, which is 24 miles away from the NRO headquarters.

Several People Killed and Injured in Scenario

The Associated Press has revealed that no real plane was going to be used in the exercise, and the crash was to be the result of mechanical failure, not terrorism. But the consequences of the simulated crash would be similar to those of the actual 9/11 attacks, albeit on a smaller scale. The newly released document describes the scene: “Various parts of the aircraft struck the outside portions of the building, spraying jet fuel. The final portions of the wreckage were scattered around the entryway between tower 1 and 2. Jet fuel was burning uncontrollably in the vicinity of the flagpoles. There are a number of injured and dead NRO employees.” Some stairwells and exits at the NRO headquarters were going to be closed off in order to simulate the damage from the crash, thereby forcing employees to find other ways to evacuate their building.

Exercise ‘Inputs’

The document reveals that the exercise was set to include numerous “inputs,” which appear to have been communications and other actions intended to make it appear more realistic to its participants.

Planned inputs included, at 9:30 a.m. a smoke generator was going to be started, to simulate the fire resulting from the crash. At 9:32, numerous phone calls would begin flooding in, from people reporting fires in various locations in the building. At 9:34, after someone reported that a small civilian jet had crashed, NRO personnel were to be instructed to evacuate their building.

At 9:37, the first engine from Fairfax County Fire Department was scheduled to arrive on the scene. (It is unclear whether real fire department personnel were going to participate in the exercise. The document states that “inputs from simulated Fairfax responders” were to be used “if Fairfax does not play.”) At 10:03, four more fire department trucks and emergency medical technician vehicles would respond to the crash. By 10:30 all the simulated fires would have been put out, but it would be confirmed that at least four NRO employees died in the crash. The exercise was set to end at 11:45 a.m.

Exercise Canceled

The exercise was reportedly called off in response to the morning’s real world attacks. However, the specific time when it was canceled is unclear. NRO spokesman Art Haubold has said only that “as soon as the real world events began, we canceled the exercise.” It is therefore unknown whether the simulated plane crash was played out, or whether the exercise had been brought to an end before it took place. After the exercise was canceled, all but the NRO’s most essential employees were sent home.

The Highly Secretive National Reconnaissance Office

The National Reconnaissance Office is a highly secretive organization. The New York Times called it “probably the most secretive of the intelligence agencies.” Until 1992, its existence had not even been officially disclosed. It is an agency of the US Department of Defense, and is responsible for ensuring “that the US has the technology and spaceborne and airborne assets needed to acquire intelligence worldwide.” According to the New York Times, the NRO “designs, builds, and operates spy satellites that photograph and overhear what other countries are up to.” It employs some 3,000 people, who are drawn from the CIA and the military.


Former High-Ranking Intelligence Officer: Cheney Responsible for 9/11

David Steele is a former 20-year Marine Corps infantry and intelligence officer, the second-ranking civilian in U.S. Marine Corps Intelligence, and former CIA clandestine services case officer.

Steele has previously written that “9/11 was at a minimum allowed to happen as a pretext for war”.

This month, Steele went further, writing:

    Pakistan briefed Cheney [about the plans for the terrorist attacks ahead of time] …nations also got wind of this and warned the CIA. We also had two walk-ins to the FBI, one in Orlando, one in Newark, that were dismissed by the FBI because the names were all virgins and not in the FBI data base—the arrogance of stupid bureaucracy.

    Cheney saw an opportunity for what Bush called his trifecta, and gave it to him by giving the go-ahead to ISI and Al Qaeda, and ordering up a terrorism exercise that allowed him to send all relevant close-in air defense strip alert craft away from the target areas, and to disable the NORTHCOM normal response to flight path diversion.

While the details might be open to debate, many other very high-level intelligence officers have said the “official” explanation for 9/11 makes no sense. And see this and this.


Tuesday, September 1, 2009

Between the Lies (2009) - full length film

Composed almost entirely of news broadcasts from 9/11, 9/12 and 9/13, this film shows the media lies that stuck with the public and more importantly, the truths that were quickly forgotten. Downloadable versions available below the fold.

HQ AVI (874MB):

DVD image (4.1 GB):

The DVD contains a chapter menu and three extras (NYC-CAN promo, 10 minute presentation about WTC7 and the trailer from 9/11: Press for Truth. The AVI file contains only the film.

Many thanks to Nate and Justin for getting this done.


TruthgoneWild is PRO America. TruthgoneWild is not, in any way, connected to, or supportive of, any person(s) who engage in violent acts towards anyone or anything, for any reason. TruthgoneWild is not, and will never be, associated with, or support, any person(s) who are involved with any kind of religious, extremist, occultist, terrorist organization(s). TruthgoneWild is not responsible for any of the people who read the TruthgoneWild blog. TruthgoneWild posts consist of information copied from other sources and a source link is provided for the reader. TruthgoneWild is not responsible for any of the authors' content. Parental discretion is advised.

TruthgoneWild is exercising our 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech. Those who attempt to hinder this right to free speech will be held accountable for their actions in a court of law. TruthgoneWild is not anti government. TruthgoneWild is anti corruption. And we the people have every right to know who in our government is corrupt.