EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- The Biggest Criminal Enterprise in History
- A 'Nonviolent Army of Love' Rises in North Carolina to Face Down Rightwing's Assault on Progress
- Collapse: Does Washington Bridge Expose the Crumbling of a Nation?
- Exclusive: Why I Spoke Out at Obama's Foreign Policy Speech
- Over a Million Signatures in Support for Sen. Warren's Student Loan Bill
- The Latest Lie: IRS Targeted Conservatives
- Rallying Cry: Citizens Worldwide to Unite in 'March Against Monsanto'
- The Biggest Criminal Enterprise in History
- A 'Nonviolent Army of Love' Rises in North Carolina to Face Down Rightwing's Assault on Progress
- Exclusive: Why I Spoke Out at Obama's Foreign Policy Speech
Popular content
Today's Top News
Lies We Still Tell Ourselves about 9/11
Have we managed to silence ourselves as well as the world with our own fears?
By their books, ye shall know them.
Smoke spews from a tower of the World Trade Center. (GETTY IMAGES)
I'm talking about the volumes, the libraries – nay, the very halls of literature – which the international crimes against humanity of 11 September 2001 have spawned. Many are spavined with pseudo-patriotism and self-regard, others rotten with the hopeless mythology of CIA/Mossad culprits, a few (from the Muslim world, alas) even referring to the killers as "boys", almost all avoiding the one thing which any cop looks for after a street crime: the motive.
Why so, I ask myself, after 10 years of war, hundreds of thousands of innocent deaths, lies and hypocrisy and betrayal and sadistic torture by the Americans – our MI5 chaps just heard, understood, maybe looked, of course no touchy-touchy nonsense – and the Taliban? Have we managed to silence ourselves as well as the world with our own fears? Are we still not able to say those three sentences: The 19 murderers of 9/11 claimed they were Muslims. They came from a place called the Middle East. Is there a problem out there?
American publishers first went to war in 2001 with massive photo-memorial volumes. Their titles spoke for themselves: Above Hallowed Ground, So Others Might Live, Strong of Heart, What We Saw, The Final Frontier, A Fury for God, The Shadow of Swords... Seeing this stuff piled on newsstands across America, who could doubt that the US was going to go to war? And long before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, another pile of tomes arrived to justify the war after the war. Most prominent among them was ex-CIA spook Kenneth Pollack's The Threatening Storm – and didn't we all remember Churchill's The Gathering Storm? – which, needless to say, compared the forthcoming battle against Saddam with the crisis faced by Britain and France in 1938.
There were two themes to this work by Pollack – "one of the world's leading experts on Iraq," the blurb told readers, among whom was Fareed Zakaria ("one of the most important books on American foreign policy in years," he drivelled) – the first of which was a detailed account of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction; none of which, as we know, actually existed. The second theme was the opportunity to sever the "linkage" between "the Iraq issue and the Arab-Israeli conflict".
The Palestinians, deprived of the support of powerful Iraq, went the narrative, would be further weakened in their struggle against Israeli occupation. Pollack referred to the Palestinians' "vicious terrorist campaign" – but without any criticism of Israel. He wrote of "weekly terrorist attacks followed by Israeli responses (sic)", the standard Israeli version of events. America's bias towards Israel was no more than an Arab "belief". Well, at least the egregious Pollack had worked out, in however slovenly a fashion, that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict had something to do with 9/11, even if Saddam had not.
In the years since, of course, we've been deluged with a rich literature of post-9/11 trauma, from the eloquent The Looming Tower of Lawrence Wright to the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, whose supporters have told us that the plane wreckage outside the Pentagon was dropped by a C-130, that the jets that hit the World Trade Centre were remotely guided, that United 93 was shot down by a US missile, etc. Given the secretive, obtuse and sometimes dishonest account presented by the White House – not to mention the initial hoodwinking of the official 9/11 commission staff – I am not surprised that millions of Americans believe some of this, let alone the biggest government lie: that Saddam was behind 9/11. Leon Panetta, the CIA's newly appointed autocrat, repeated this same lie in Baghdad only this year.
There have been movies, too. Flight 93 re-imagined what may (or may not) have happened aboard the plane which fell into a Pennsylvania wood. Another told a highly romanticised story, in which the New York authorities oddly managed to prevent almost all filming on the actual streets of the city. And now we're being deluged with TV specials, all of which have accepted the lie that 9/11 did actually change the world – it was the Bush/Blair repetition of this dangerous notion that allowed their thugs to indulge in murderous invasions and torture – without for a moment asking why the press and television went along with the idea. So far, not one of these programmes has mentioned the word "Israel" – and Brian Lapping's Thursday night ITV offering mentioned "Iraq" once, without explaining the degree to which 11 September 2001 provided the excuse for this 2003 war crime. How many died on 9/11? Almost 3,000. How many died in the Iraq war? Who cares?
Publication of the official 9/11 report – in 2004, but read the new edition of 2011 – is indeed worth study, if only for the realities it does present, although its opening sentences read more like those of a novel than of a government inquiry. "Tuesday ... dawned temperate and nearly cloudless in the eastern United States... For those heading to an airport, weather conditions could not have been better for a safe and pleasant journey. Among the travellers were Mohamed Atta..." Were these guys, I ask myself, interns at Time magazine?
But I'm drawn to Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan whose The Eleventh Day confronts what the West refused to face in the years that followed 9/11. "All the evidence ... indicates that Palestine was the factor that united the conspirators – at every level," they write. One of the organisers of the attack believed it would make Americans concentrate on "the atrocities that America is committing by supporting Israel". Palestine, the authors state, "was certainly the principal political grievance ... driving the young Arabs (who had lived) in Hamburg".
The motivation for the attacks was "ducked" even by the official 9/11 report, say the authors. The commissioners had disagreed on this "issue" – cliché code word for "problem" – and its two most senior officials, Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, were later to explain: "This was sensitive ground ...Commissioners who argued that al-Qa'ida was motivated by a religious ideology – and not by opposition to American policies – rejected mentioning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict... In their view, listing US support for Israel as a root cause of al-Qa'ida's opposition to the United States indicated that the United States should reassess that policy." And there you have it.
So what happened? The commissioners, Summers and Swan state, "settled on vague language that circumvented the issue of motive". There's a hint in the official report – but only in a footnote which, of course, few read. In other words, we still haven't told the truth about the crime which – we are supposed to believe – "changed the world for ever". Mind you, after watching Obama on his knees before Netanyahu last May, I'm really not surprised.
When the Israeli Prime Minister gets even the US Congress to grovel to him, the American people are not going to be told the answer to the most important and "sensitive" question of 9/11: why?
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
468 Comments so far
Show AllThanks PR. Yes, the heading is apropos, isn't it? For the True Believers are still telling themselves lies about 9/11. And "They" in the MIMIC are also still telling lies--the lies that support the True Believers remaining in denial.
Gerald,
While it's possible many of the individuals encountered in these discussions are paid govt. agents who don't believe what they are saying, I tend to think it more probable that they are True Believers--people incapable of exercising skepticism toward the government in general on matters of "national security." Moreover, I don't think there is necessarily any difference between these two categories--True Believers and the disinfo agents, except that one is getting paid and the other is not.
If you were going to promulgate disinformation in this way, wouldn't you want to find people who really believe the official story to make the case online, rather than people who don't believe it? The former will make more effective disinfo agents than the latter. And from my own experience, I know for a fact that there are MANY True Believers, among the left and center, and probably the right as well.
The way this probably works, and there is no way to know for sure because it is secret, is that the CIA creates "conservative" front groups who then enroll true-blue "patriots" who want to defend their government against these allegations that 9-11 was an inside job. The conservatives who reply to such ads are then paid to post their lame defenses of the official conspiracy theory (OCT). Hell, some of these people may be retirees working for nothing, for all I know. But they are "paid" in the sense that their organizations are CIA front groups, the computers and whatnot are bought with CIA/Secret Govt. funds, whether they know it or not.
Some front organizations could possibly even be "liberal" or "progressive" so that they can attract persons who would more easily be able to make the case to other progressives.
But let us assume for a moment that the CIA or one of its partner agencies is simply hiring people and explicitly telling them to disseminate propaganda. Don't you think they would want to hire people who believe what they are saying? From the POV of the disinfo agent, even if they are getting paid for it, to them they are doing righteous work, defending the Homeland from scurrilous accusations.
In general, I think a far greater threat to our democracy than agent provocateurs are the people--millions of them--who choose to remain in denial, to "not see" (Nazi) what is there in plain site for them to see, to just refuse to examine evidence and draw conclusions based on reasonable analysis.
Furthermore, and this goes to a larger issue I've addressed elsewhere in this thread, in general, calling one's debating opponent a disinfo agent is something to be avoided. The frequency with which I have seen some in this movement put that label on others makes me wonder whether or not some of THEM may not be agent provocateurs themselves. The more of that that happens, the more paranoid everyone gets, the more organizations fall apart in internecine bickering--just what "They" want. So in general I favor a Big Tent approach to 911 truth. Of course, you disassociate yourself from the Judy Woods and the video fakery crowd, you don't waste much time debating them, because certainly THAT crowd are agent provocateurs.
I basically use the term True Believer because it points to a cognitive disorder that many millions of people suffer from. (Google it, and find the entry on skeptic.com) And their condition makes the work of the disinfo agents ever so much easier. But I have to believe the True Believer Syndrome is a curable condition. And, again, I believe the prevalence of that disorder is a far greater threat to our moribund democracy than the latest COINTELPRO program.
Gerald,
Yes, we both have some faith in humanity left, otherwise we wouldn't be posting about this, would we? I don't know, I haven't much faith in the teeming masses, or an iota of faith in the Dick Cheneys and the rest of his ilk in the MIMIC (Military Industrial Media Infotainment Complex), and the Organization Men who sit at the levers of power running this whole insane global capitalist machine. But there are still individual human beings worth saving, worth fighting for, and the wonderful animals on this beautiful planet. And Truth is worth fighting for, regardless of its "strategic" value.
Why all the animosity? If 9-11 was an inside job you've got criminals at the highest levels of government whose lies and schemes resulted in the deaths of thousands of citizens. If 9-11 wasn't an inside job you've still got criminals at the highest levels of government whose lies and schemes resulted in the deaths of thousands of citizens.
I don't understand why this is such a divisive issue.
Holy crap, you actually have the nerve to post such bullshit?
The banality of evil exists on that fence that you sit on.
I won't deny your thoughts having been provoked, in the direction you chose. Mine are provoked differently.
ctrl-z, your passion for truth and justice is inspiring. ;-)
lol
Alexander Cockburn's latest Counter Punch column ponders the issue of 9/11 of conspiracism:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/02/the-911-conspiracists-vindicated-after-all-these-years/
He notes the gradual extinction of any serious study of the political economy by leftists anymore:
"...These days a dwindling number of leftists learn their political economy from Marx. Into the theoretical and strategic void has crept a diffuse, peripatic conspiracist view of the world that tends to locate ruling class devilry not in the crises of capital accumulation, or the falling rate of profit, or inter-imperial competition, but in locale (the Bohemian Grove, Bilderberg, Ditchley, Davos) or supposedly “rogue” agencies, with the CIA still at the head of the list. The 9/11 “conspiracy”, or “inside job”, is the Summa of all this foolishness..."
What stands out the most for me in the narratives provided by the "9/11 Truthers" is a steadfast refusal to see 9/11 as an act of anti-U.S. imperialism resistance among Arabs. Those Arabs are not only too stupid to have pulled it off, but they were actually the puppets of the U.S. government. So from this point of view the Truthers are in agreement with the mainstream lie that 9/11 had anything to do with resistance to U.S. Middle East policy. Instead of countering the mainstream myth of Arab hatred of the way of life and envy of American wealth, much of left cooked up another myth of Arabs as Cheney's sock puppets.
That meme is so tired ALREADY.
"What stands out the most for me in the narratives provided by the "9/11 Truthers" is a steadfast refusal to see 9/11 as an act of anti-U.S. imperialism resistance among Arabs. "
Just so much bullshit to seriously respond to. It is as if, you actually believe, that all "Truthers" are Americans oblivious to American foreign policy, particularly after WW2.
Quite to the contrary. Most "truthers", "troofers", "conspiracists", "or pick a new insulting label for us", are likely to be Americans who happen to be the MOST aware of US foreign policy, as it has related to the Middle East post WW2. In fact, I would guess, that the whacked out truther demographic, probably is likely to be aware of not only how our foreign policy has been brutally unjust to Arabs, but also to Persians, SE Asians, South Americans, Latin Americans, Africans, etc.
Most of us, who suspect involvement to whatever degree, by people in the highest level of our shadow government, in the events of 9/11, are driven very much by the the sense of justice that you would deny we possess. The events of 9/11 were the pretext FOR attacking Arabs, AND expanding US imperialism via resource wars.
Your argument falls flat.
"...The events of 9/11 were the pretext FOR attacking Arabs...."
Nice fairy tale. Prior to 2001, Washington was already involved in the occupation of Arab land, engaged in a defacto state of war with Iraq since 1990, plus, helping continue Israel's defacto campaign of ethnic cleansing against Palestine. It has been a deeply held belief in the Western world that the West has some kind of a divine right to attack Arabs, or basically anybody outside of Europe and the U.S. The underlying pretext for U.S. foreign policy is that we own the world and we're going to use our military might as we see fit. There is no need to cook up a complex plot to destroy several buildings stateside for the U.S. to flex its military might against Iraq, or anybody else.
The U.S. led assault against Iraq in 1991 left the country devastated, and might have killed up 250,000 Iraqis during and in the immediate aftermath of the assault. The basic infrastructure of a modern urban civilization was destroyed. Even more devastating for Iraq was the savage embargo imposed on the country by the U.S. and Britain. The sanction regime was so draconian that two administrators of the post 1995 Oil For Food Program, Dennis Halliday and Hans von Sponek, resigned in disgust, rightly characterizing the sanctions as genocidal. Yet you characterize this as a "minor scuffle". Tell that to Iraqis with memories of the 1990-2003 period of U.S.-Iraqi relations. This is consistent with insistence of Truthers to downplay Arab grievances with U.S. government policy prior to 2001.
The "baby incubator" story was a PR stunt by Hill & Knowlton, a private PR firm hired by the Kuwaiti government to propagandize their cause in exile after the Iraqi invasion:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hill_%26_Knowlton#Government_of_Kuwait
http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html
That's what PR firms do. Obviously, this well documented PR stunt is evidence that the cabal in the Bush administration that pulled off 9/11 spent weeks preparing for a "controlled demolition" of the Towers, and bombing the Pentagon with a missile, while carefully disposing of the plane that was flown into the building.
Yes, I must be an agent doing "psy-ops". The old standby of the conspiracists in dealing with anybody they disagree with. If you don't agree with them completely, then you must be a part of the plot to hit the Pentagon with a missile being vectored in from Cheney's secret bunker, or take down Wellstone's plane. Or you're part of the cover-up. But I'm the one engaged in "character assassination" for pointing out the publicly stated views of Griffin and Fetzer and their ilk. You have know idea who I am, but that doesn't prevent you from stating without any evidence that I'm doing "pys-ops". So typical.
U.S. military aggression is always wrong, whatever the justification used, and whoever happens to be the president, Obama included. It's always been about world domination, and this has been understood by the anti-war movement for the past century or near. So the fact that I don't buy into every idiot conspiracy put forward by the Truther cult makes me a government agent.
"BTW, one keynote of agent provocateurs, is that they always push away from being responsive to anything..."
Actually, that is what happens when a Democrat gets elected to the White House. In the lead up to the invasion of Iraq in February 2003 we had a demonstration of around 50,000 or near here in Seattle. Good luck getting 1/10th that to show up for a demo during Obama time. How are we going to promote that kind of resistance to U.S. imperialism is a far more important question than all this "research" to find conspiracies where none exist.
it's clear you fail to understand how the state uses black ops to justify its imperial policy. you should read Danielle Ganser's book on how NATO/CIA orchestrated terrorist acts against civilians to be blamed on the communist left (i.e. false flag attacks). the goal was to prevent any communist party from being elected into office.
the book is called NATOs Secret Armies: Operation Gladio and Terrorism in Western Europe. Chomsky has a blurb on the back actually. 911 was a classic Gladio style operation designed to justify every policy/war/torture that followed.
here's the book: http://amzn.to/lU7Ep2
Yeah, Washington aggressively intervened in the elections in Italy in the late '40's, which probably helped ensure Communist losses at the polls. So obviously their must have been a secret operation more than 50 years later to destroy several building in the U.S. and blame it on Arabs, who have no grievances with the U.S.
yup, you don't get it. you should read the book. you don't understand the bigger picture. the state will use any tactic to justify it's policies, including killing it's own. these people are ruthless imperialists.
Gladio operations were false-flag attacks, a very similar MO used in 911. understanding black ops, which as Durritix clearly explained, is necessary to understand the context for the 911 attacks.
the evidence (the actual data) overwhelmingly supports the conclusion that 911 was an inside job. others on this thread have covered the evidence. in regards to the anti-war movement, exposing 911 is an organizers dream which too many leftists ignored in favor of respectability.
Yes, I get it. I don't want to join your silly cult.
Is that the best you can do? Resort to ad hominems? Why don't you watch what scientists are saying instead of burying your head in the sand of Respectable Leftist denial:
Mark Basile, C.E. on the evidence for explosives in the dust:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frIpyTBAV_Y
Trailer for upcoming documentary, Experts Speak Out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsW4F95GEM8
Niels Harrit, PhD Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, lead author on nano-thermite paper
Download the peer reviewed paper, unchallenged for 2+ years, here:
http://bitly.com/giOtDy
apparently the scientific community are not all in lock-step with one another.
http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/911nutphysics.htm
Ah, Cockburn is resurrecting the old and fallacious structuralism vs. conspiracism dichotomy, eh? That's been addressed years ago and repeatedly by such stalwart leftists as Michael Parenti, yet nitwits like Cockburn never tire of it.
http://www.questionsquestions.net/documents2/conspiracyphobia.html
What stands out for me the most about True Believers is their steadfast refusal to look at empirical evidence, and their gullible, 'take-the-government's-word-for-it' approach to the issue of 911. Also, their insistence upon turning everything into a discussion of US foreign policy, and their conflation of Means and Motive, i.e., if "Arabs" had a Motive to do 911, somehow, necessarily they also possessed the Means to do 911--which is pure poppycock.
It seems clear that Robert Fisk left the MSM in order to infiltrate the alternative media. He clearly never stopped being a presstitute. Luckily, the wheat and the chaff are ever easier to separate, as the story about 19 Muslims with box knives is only credible to those who get their "news" from their idiot boxes at 5:00 p.m.
a wonderful Pakistani man runs our local gas station. Over the years of going to his business for the million reasons one does, we became friends. We introduced our families, shared holiday greetings and the comfortable small talk of neighbors. I learned that he had fought with the Afghans against the Russians and moved here to Canada to escape the madness when that war ended.
<>About a week after 9-11 i summoned my courage to go and speak to my Muslim friend about what he thought about all of this. I was still reeling with all the screaming from south of the border about Muslims and jihads and box-cutters and nothing made sense. I was worried about embarrassing him or somehow insulting him but felt our friendship would allow my questions and his honest response.
<>Before i could finish my query, he stopped me and said, "You mustn't believe what they are saying. It was the Israelis." In the hopeless naivety of that time in my life, that was a jarring statement. I was shocked to hear my gentle friend say such an outrageous thing. I left quickly, despairing that he had uttered such an antisemitic pronouncement. I avoided him for a long time.
<>Years later i returned to his business and apologized. In the ensuing time i had delved deeper and deeper into that mysterious day. And from what i learned, i believe he was right. He forgave me for judging him with my own terrible brand of bigotry. Some truths are more painful than the lie.
Yes, he was right. The Mossad has been impersonating Arabs and committing acts of terror for many years. Just think of the King David Hotel bombing, or the Lavon Affair, or the WTC 93 bombing (with help from the FBI). One could list many more. It's their stock in trade. 'By way of deceit thou shalt do war' is the Mossad motto.
The big commemoration of 9/11/01 is building up steam. I predict that none of the U.S. MSM reports, and probably none of the events the MSM will report about, will include any mention, let alone sympathy, for the hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians killed in the aftermath of 9/11 and as a direct result of that operation. Everything will focus on a mere 3,000 dead in the U.S. Survivors here will be featured abundantly, as if the grieving survivors elsewhere around the globe, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq, don't exist.
The battle between the Conspiracy and Coincidence theorists continues with neither side giving an inch.
I read with great interest and respect the vast amount of information that has been posted. I read tons after that awful event. When I watched the towers go down I said to my friend I was having breakfast with, "Why, that looks like a demolition job!" Read many books, and I wonder how many heard Bin Laden's SUPPOSED comment after 911, that it took 5 years to pull the event off. That it cost $500,000 all told. That it was perpetuated to avenge the killing of innocents in other American attacks, and that he wanted Americans to feel what it is like to have their own killed on their soil.
Anyone else hear that statement on radio supposedly by Bin Laden? But IF as we know rumors were at the WH 1 and a half years prior the event that these people were here to hijack planes into buildings, and if there was too much asbestos in the Towers to clean up at the tune of a trillion? and if Cheney had ordered Norad to not to interfere, and if there was that famous memo Clark quoted, "what we need is a Pearl Harbor like event to get into Iraq," and if all the money/gold etc was gone from the safes below in 911 before it /they fell, and if it was true Jeb Bush had people working in the Towers, and if all the evidence was in building 7 as they worked to prepare the demolition etc, then it needed to be demolished to hide all evidence, then if all this true, that if it was cheaper to demolish the towers than spend trillion to get asbestos out, and again if all this is true , why were government officials told not to fly the night before, and was it true stocks were traded by the millions the night before?, then the conclusion has to be an inside job as many suspect.
As Oswald was the 'patsy' for the assassination of JFK, could not Bin Laden have been the 'patsy' for this heinous event? Could it not have been a phony Bin Laden who spoke about his great plan, and why the endless amount of time before he was 'captured'/'shot' if indeed he was the cause? So many do not believe the shooting of him was real anyway, but if it was, why so long from the event?
I am only a seeker. And these are my thoughts, questions.
I have come to the conclusion that the time wasted on 9/11 conspiracies is the death of the left. Some research about the effect of conspicacists on the left might be useful.
I have stopped writing on Commondreams because I have observed it has been largely taken over by conspiracists and I would be wasting my time and effort.
I respect Oswald-was-a-leftist but believe he/she is also wasting his/her time on this forum.
I am definitely not against wasting time about conspiracies because I am worried about my reputation or credibility in mainstream or anything like that. I am someone who knows from prior personal experience how it is possible to be caught up in conspiracy theories. I have found that whether or not the conspiracy is true or not, getting caught up in one or more usually lessens your ability to be of any use as an effective agent of social change.
A lot of leftists disagree with you. Many of use use the term SCADs (State Crimes Against Democracy) as an analytical framework for understanding the system we are up against...
I highly recommend you listen to two talks on the subject by well respected leftist activists that challenge the silly academic framing of this issue, aka the "structuralist/functionalist" debate. The two people I am referring to are Michael Parenti and Peter Phillips (founder of Project Censored).
Check out the two talks (click on download arrow at bottom):
1. Michael Parenti: http://radio4all.net/index.php/program/45375
2. Peter Phillips: http://radio4all.net/index.php/program/45270
Jan, nobody is stopping you from writing. It may feel like some "9/11 conspiracists" are controlling this site but they aren't. I actually welcome listening to people here speaking out for the 9/11 Truth. Most progressive/liberal sites would censor their comments or delete their accounts altogether. You're welcome to go there but haven't you been paying attention to this site? There are plenty of topics and discussions. If you don't like to talk about 9/11, then ignore and move on to topics where you're comfortable talking like some of us do. But I'll grant you one thing. I believe that 9/11 was mostly an insider job but I'll stay gentle and go over this with you. Deal?
those in charge of defense failed...
those in charge of the crime scene failed...
those in charge of investigation failed...
these failures are treasonous...
Nancy Pelosi, as Speaker, was key...she had to stop impeachment, and did...
when the truth is suppressed, one can spew anything, and call it such...
if the question is one of motive, the first thing one would have to do is look at what actually occurred...who made what stock trades before the event? what offices in the three buildings were destroyed, what businesses did those offices contain, and what were those businesses doing?
what if some were investigating crimes involving those that executed 911, and what if evidence in such investigations was destroyed on 911? would that not show motive? what were the businesses, and what were they doing?
Well, this wouldn't be a lie about 9/11. If someone with the resources really wanted to know what hit the pentagon, I recommend making a life size silhouette of the side view of a 757 AND a cruise missile. Place them in the area where the camera at the car park area video captured 'something' passing in the back ground and hitting the pentagon and compare them to what flew into the pentagon in the video. That would prove that is was not a 757 that struck the pentagon. But then you would probably not be able to conduct such test as you would be thrown out of the pentagon on your ear. But that in itself would lean heavily against a 757 NOT hitting the pentagon. Of course the whole thing could be done at reduced or half scale some where else by professionals that could reproduce the reduced scales that would show the required proof.
Think about that. If would virtually shut down one of the 'attacks' as terrorist and pretty much demonstrate what did hit the pentagon.
Funny how people refuse to face the obvious. The 9/11 attack was either carried out by, or facilitated by some sections of the US Administration.
There is no other viable explanation.
To those who proclaim that the 'government' wouldn't do such a thing, I suggest you read up on some real history --- that is not the John Wayne Hollywood type version that people have stuffed down their necks.
It would be a rare government that would not kill its own people to achieve, or make politically possible some aim to which it was committed. The Bush administration collectively would not have lost a seconds sleep in authorising such an event.
We did it to ourselves in order to start a war...period. The instigators, American politicians who are hiding, should be charged and hanged.
Walking*
Walking in silent, screaming terror, with a hundred floors below you as those above screech and moan under the weight of their own failing, eminent collapse,
Walking through the choking, black and gray smoke, thick and dark with the heavy, sickening fear that life and love are slowly ebbing away,
Walking with each step toward the hope of light and family, as the sound and smell of deaths footprint strides quickly and effortlessly nearer,
Walking surrounded by the courage and faith of those cloaked in yellow or blue, their confidant steps resounding through the horror which engulfs you, each soft beat of soul to carpet echo’s the drum of a selfless leader destine to rise far above these acts of human folly,
Walking lower and lower, descending toward the safety of an uncertain future,
Walking this path together hand in hand, arm in arm, supporting one and the other, as those three thousand souls did and now continue to do, while embracing the challenge of facing fear is the single most important and giving memorial we the living can offer the memory their collective sacrifice demands as it calls from beneath the crushing, grinding rubble and history of competition and war,
Walking as one unto the blossoming....
Age of Compassion.
Ever since the Europeans illegally invaded this land and turned their hate towards the natives, there has been hate against some group of people. Black, Jews, Irish, Italian, and on down now to the Muslims. Of course the main reason now is,-- land for Israel and oil for the oil companies, especially the Koch Industries.
Not sure if this article has already been mentioned, but it's well worth reading: "You Only Believe The Officical 9/11 Story Because You Don't Know The Official 9/11 Story", here: http://dandelionsalad.wordpress.com/2011/09/05/you-only-believe-the-official-911-story-because-you-dont-know-the-official-911-story-by-jesse-richard/
Dude, you don't have a clue.
Check out Dr. Tarpley to catch up and get up to speed.
http://tarpley.net/audio/getfile.php?f=20110907-WGT_on_Rense.mp3
After reading the comments, I forgot what the article was about. I remember thinking that it was well written and asking the question that should have been asked long ago. So we helped to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine and said little while the Israeli terrorist government drove the people off their land. When they rose up against Israel, we made sure that Israel had the weapons to defend itself. Through all the atrocities committed against the Palestinian people, we have rarely had even a word of condemnation. Instead of asking why the world hates us, we ask did Dick Cheney and the Bushits plot the whole thing?
Truthers, believers, analysts, brainwashed, know-it-alls, conspiratists.....
YOU ALL will be completely stunned when you read below. You will get a picture, which will be extremely hard to swallow, and very painful to digest: “Collateral Damage” by E. P Heidner, part I and II.
>>> www.scribd.com/people/documents/2169400-ep-heidner <<<.
This article is a nasty example of the "looking back" the O administration is averse to. It sure would clear some court dockets if our legal system were to not look back...
And a good place to start looking for operatives would be the 1200 new "security" contractors set up the day after the event and put on the dole.
Posts here by 9/11 "truthers" see an inside job that would have to involve a great deal of conspirators - hundreds maybe, even thousands! And yet, ten years later not a single whistle-blower or memoirist has come forth with revelations that would support these co-called truths. That's important, considering the fact that secrets in Washington, even between two people, don't stay secret for long.
If that logic carries no weight with the conspiracy theorists, I'll add another: why in the world would the government go to such extremes? Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld were able to hoodwink the public, politicians and media, fabricating a threat from Iraq, which had nothing to do with 911, and change the story line at will. It was dead easy. There's your inside job, and in true Washington fashion, it is now documented down to the finest detail.
"Why in the world would the government go to such extremes?"
Well, you just have to work through: “Collateral Damage” by E. P Heidner, part I and II.
>>> www.scribd.com/people/documents/2169400-ep-heidner <<<
It will answer your question.. But I can tell you now, it will be very hard to digest.
Apparently you have never really read much of the 'project for the new amerikan century', a neoconservative agendas for what this world has been turned to for their benefit:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/
And I don't think anyone should believe that any intelligence agency in this country would hesitate to throw its own personnel under the bus for even the smallest hint of betraying those who are supposedly 'in charge', after all, rendition isn't just for those ghosts, the terrorists.
If you haven't done so already, you owe it to yourself, to America, and to the world to view www.ae911truth.org.