My thoughts on September 11... for whatever they may be worth.

I'll grant that could be nothing.

First and foremost, I have serious problems with the official version that will go down in the history books. I have too many unanswered questions and have seen and read other critiques that pique my interest. I am automatically suspicious of censorship and redaction, both of which have occurred in the documentary evidence. This is a puzzle where the pieces don't seem to fit and I'm not sure I've even got all the pieces in the box. Heck, I don't have a guide as to what the final picture should look like to even know if I've put it together properly.

I do not know if I will ultimately be LIHOP, MIHOP or neither. I have my suspicions and biases but I cannot offer incontrovertible proof to render my beliefs into facts. And indeed I have reservations regarding my doubts.

Regardless of which organization is responsible, 9/11 was a complex operation to pull off. It's rare for two people to keep a secret let alone tens or hundreds or thousands. We've got whistleblowers at voting machine companies and the NSA. Wouldn't there be a whistleblower if the government pulled this off? Surely one person would be suffering a crisis of conscience at some point. And that doesn't even take into account unrelated emergency workers after the fact who would have spotted major discrepancies.

I was living in metro NY at the time and can still smell the smoke when I think about that day. My chest constricts and I feel nauseas. I really cannot wrap my brain around PNAC deliberately murdering U.S. citizens. Well, I can and I can't.

Something is not right about September 11, but I am having serious difficulty separating the wheat from the chaff. I honestly don't know which parts of which theories make the most sense.

Not likely:

1. They are in the business of keeping secrets.

2. Without evidence, how could they come foreword?

"Surely one person would be suffering a crisis of conscience at some point. "

Yes. Sibel Edmonds suffered a crisis of conscience and she spoke out and now she
is the most heavily gagged person in US history."

Coleen Rowley Suffered a crisis of conscience - she could have kept her mouth
shut but she didn't and now we know the FBI thwarted her attempt to uncover what
Mousaui was doing.

Indira Singh spoke out and she was black listed in her industry.

there are others as well.

Not only do we not have all the pieces of the puzzle, but we have a whole lot of
pieces from a whole lot of other puzzles mixed in.

But anybody who investigates past the surface can agree, we need a new investigation.


The smell. I'll never forget that burnt-wiring smell that filled the air the evening of
9/12.

Sibel Edmonds is the most important one, however she is one of the many. There are even more who are not whistleblowers but got their crisis of conscience like that Republican congressman (forgot his name) who was ordered to destroy everything related to Able Danger, many within the FBI have expressed frustration that they were not allowed to investigate anything.

The thing which we don't have yet is definite proof under oath, however remember it wasn't until the trial of E. Howard Hunt vs. Liberty Lobby when CIA agent Marita Lorenz confessed under oath that the CIA was directly involved in the planning and assassination of John Kennedy. Mind you, that was 1981 so it wasn't until 18 years later that definite undeniable proof emerged. Please note that the media failed to report that event even though they were present during the trial, yet not a single reporter mentioned that testimony.

It is also important to note that there were many warnings and many other intelligence services knew that something was going to happen in New York and tried to warn them. That means that there were lots of leaks even before it happened, however a "smoking gun" is rarely found.

The number of people involved: like all operations it would be quite a lot, however most only knew a small part.

As far as investigating goes, the best way is to just start somewhere and there are plenty of question marks, however that is not that relevant. There are plenty of good documentaries on the internet, so might want to start there and don't let the nay-sayer discourage you, because they tend to focus on one weak point and use that to invalidate the whole story. Ask yourself instead why the official story is completely unproven and full of contradictions and outright lies. Personally I started reading the official 9/11 commission report and didn't read everything but often skipped parts, however if you just read it with a little bit of sceptism, it'll become clear that there is very little truth in that report.

And there are people for whom somebody else's life is irrelevant and we have seen with Katrina how irrelevant the citizens were. I'm sure that Bush was more concerned with his image than with those dead bodies floating in the water. Empathy is not a characteristic found in all people.

recommend you start with David Ray Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor." It's well-organized, well-written and makes no rabid claims for any particular LIHOP or MIHOP scenario, rather structuring itself in 7 (I think) levels of possible BFEE complicity, starting with the mildest form of LIHOP and graduating to the most severe form of MIHOP. Each particular element of 9/11 is discussed in detail with a good set of notes for further reading and fact-checking.

Just got another book from the library-War on Truth by Nafez Ahmed, his second on the whole shebang. I would highly recommend it. He's based in England I believe. Soo..I've read a lot about all the theories-but some things are facts, like all the war games on 9/11. There were at least four in the skies that day. So I come across this phrase about the "phantom flight 11". Something about this whole story just makes me ill. Even though you gotta admit, it sounds so poetic. Kinda like 9/11 itself, so many phantoms.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A50791-2004Jun17?language=printer

Panel investigators also tersely concluded that authorities with NORAD repeatedly misinformed the commission in testimony last fall about its scrambling of fighters from Langley. NORAD officials indicated at the time that the jets were responding to either United Flight 93 or American Flight 77. In fact, the panel found, they were chasing "a phantom aircraft," American Flight 11, which had already struck the World Trade Center.

The commission found that officials were confronted with numerous false reports of hijacked aircraft that morning. "We fought many phantoms that day," testified Gen. Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

~
It seems SO manipulated. So many coincidences. They were chasing the wrong planes?!!! WTF? Oh yeah and only after all of the real ones have already crashed. And they continue to blame the FAA and NEVER the military (naturally). NORAD has changed their story several times. The one thing that made my heart sink was reading about the lack of the military to do a damn thing on 9/11. That's where it all started for me and it remains the top smoking gun in my eyes. It's just unfathomable.

:sarcasm:

was Operation Neowoods.

it's far worse. Keep in mind for example that we now torture innocent civilians all over the world -- waterboard them, pull out their teeth, kill them and dump their mutilated bodies on the road.

That's how it's been for the last five years, and I don't expect anything to change.

getting "them" all together was part of plan that day.