The Truth About 9/11
Making the Case for Our Government's Involvement
(Part II of III)
by John R. Berkowitz

The great masses of the people ... will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.

– Adolph Hitler

UNEXPLAINED BEHAVIOR

In Part I of this exposé I examined the physical evidence of the attacks of September 11, 2001 - the crash sites of Flight 93 in Pennsylvania, Flight 77 in Washington, and Flights 11 and 175 in New York as well as the subsequent collapse of the Twin Towers.

The collective analysis of this evidence does far more to discredit the official explanation of 9/11 than support it. In fact, there appears to be far more evidence in support of popular "conspiracy theories" than officials have thus far provided in support of their own explanation. If this does not suggest a cover-up to most observers it has certainly suggested one to growing numbers of people both in America and abroad. These people - many of whom have helped form and swell the ranks of the 9/11 Truth Movement - have not been content to bicker over the fine points of aerodynamics or controlled demolition. They have begun looking into the workings of our government agencies, and the conditions that could have led to the kinds of breakdowns the 9/11 Commission reported.

FEIGNED IGNORANCE

President Bush and members of his administration stated publicly(80) and repeatedly after September 11th that they had no inkling that terrorists were planning to attack Americans on their own soil(81) or that they had planned to used airplanes as missiles.(82) However investigators and former members of the administration have revealed literally hundreds of warnings – both general and specific – that were received by Bush and his administration in the eight months of his term prior to September 11th.(83)

The most publicized ignored warning was President Bush’s August 6, 2001 PDB (Presidential Daily Briefing), titled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”(84) Unlike typical PDBs which are two to three pages, this report was reportedly 11½ pages in length.(85) This briefing was kept secret by the Bush administration until its existence was revealed by the FBI in May of 2002. In a hastily-convened press-conference, then-National Security Advisor, Condoleezza Rice, stated(86) that the briefing “was an analytic report that talked about UBL's methods of operation, talked about what he had done historically, in 1997, in 1998.” “It was not,” she reiterated, “a warning.” She also famously declared, “I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center.”

In fact, it has been standard operating procedure since the 1996 Atlanta Olympics to create “no-fly zones” for certain high-profile occasions – because of possible threat from hijacked jetliners. Called the “Atlanta Rules,” this extensive set of security measures, which includes closing nearby airspace and deploying interceptor helicopters, was used several times prior to 9/11, including at George W. Bush’s inauguration(87) in January of 2001. In July, 2001, Italian authorities put in place even more aggressive anti-aircraft measures for the G8 Meeting in Genoa, including batteries of surface-to-air missiles, fighter jets and off-shore naval vessels. In fact, President Bush stayed on-board the American aircraft carrier, USS Enterprise, out of fear of an air-based assassination attempt from Osama bin Laden.(88)

There had also been specific warnings of terrorists using airplanes as weapons. In 1999, for example, a report prepared for the CIA warned that terrorists associated with Osama bin Laden had plans to hijack an airplane and crash it into the Pentagon.(89) The report also recounts well-known case studies of similar plots. Aside from such warnings, our government had tangible evidence that al Queda-affiliated terrorists could and would use airplanes as missiles, in the form of the foiled “Project Bojinka” in which Pakistani national, Abdul Hakim Murad was set to crash an aircraft loaded with C-4 and semtex explosives into CIA headquarters.(90)

As a result the FBI investigated various flight schools in North Carolina, New York, and Oklahoma, where al Queda operatives had taken flight training.(91) In fact, as recently as July, 2001, FBI agent, Ken Williams, authored a memo detailing 10 different Middle Eastern men attending flight school in Phoenix, AZ.(92)

Indeed, there were military training exercises specifically focused on responding to hijacked planes being flown into buildings.(93) One wonders if Dr. Rice was truly as ignorant as she claimed to have been.

IGNORED WARNINGS

According to the Bush administration, terrorism has always been its highest priority – even before September 11, 2001. Yet for the first eight months of his presidency, George Bush held just one cabinet-level meeting on terrorism – one week before 9/11. Richard Clarke, the top anti-terrorism advisor held over from the previous administration, met with President Clinton on a weekly basis. However, upon expressing his concerns to National Security Advisor Rice, Clarke was demoted from a cabinet-level position to a staff-level position.(94) In contrast, CIA Director, George Tenet, before the 9/11 Commission, rejected the notion that the CIA had failed to do its job, declaring, “Failure means no focus, no attention, no discipline, and those were not present in what we or the FBI did, here and around the world.”(95) But, if this was true, certainly any of the following occurrences should have tipped off these hyper-alert G-men:

• January 31, 2001: The bipartisan US Commission on National Security/21st Century issued its final report on domestic terrorism. Co-chairmen former Senators Gary Hart (D) and Warren Rudman (R) personally brief National Security Adviser Rice, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, and Secretary of State Powell on the commission’s findings and their 50 recommendations for combating terrorism in the U.S. The report stated, “A direct attack against American citizens on American soil is likely over the next quarter century.” The Bush Administration was disinclined to follow the report’s recommendations, instead announcing that Vice President Dick Cheney would study the “potential problem of domestic terrorism” – which the commission had just concluded two and a half years studying.(96)

•Spring 2001: The National Security Agency (NSA) had been recording Osama bin Laden’s satellite phone calls since 1996, noting that the person he spoke with most frequently was his mother, Hamida, whose line they also monitored. In one phone conversation with Hamida, bin Laden said he would not be able to call her again for a long time, adding, “Great events are about to take place.” At the time, President Bush was so convinced that this would be the way to catch the terrorist leader that he told the Emir of Qatar, “We know that he’ll call his mother one day – and then well get him.”(97) No effort was made to “get” bin Laden after this call was recorded.

•April, 2001: In the spring and summer of 2001, American intelligence picked up a number of reports on al Qaeda that strongly indicated a pending major attack against American targets. For example, in April, 2001, one intelligence source suggested that Osama bin Laden was interested in using commercial pilots as terrorists. The source warned that al Qaeda wanted to mount another attack or attacks like the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 – something “spectacular and traumatic.”(98)

•April 1, 2001 – September 10, 2001: Between these dates the FAA received 105 intelligence summaries. Of these, 52 mentioned bin Laden, al Qaeda, or both. Five of them mentioned al Qaeda’s training for hijackings and two reports concerned suicide operations unconnected to aviation. Despite all these warnings, the FAA failed to take any extra security measures.(99)

• April-May, 2001: President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and various national security aides were given briefing papers with titles including, “Bin Laden Planning Multiple Operations,” “Bin Laden Public Profile May Presage Attack,” and “Bin Laden Network’s Plans Advancing.” The exact contents of these briefings remain classified.(100)

• May-July, 2001: During this period, the NSA reported it had intercepted “at least 33 communications indicating a possible, imminent terrorist attack.”(101) None of these communications offered specific details. This information was distributed to several other intelligence agencies. Later, National Security Adviser Rice stated that she had read “chatter that was picked up in [2001s] spring and summer. ‘Unbelievable news coming in weeks,’ said one. ‘A big event ... there will be a very, very, very, very big uproar.’ ‘There will be attacks in the near future.”(102) These reports were dismissed.

•June-July, 2001: President Bush, Vice President Cheney, and various national security aides were given briefing papers with titles including, “Bin Laden Threats Are Real” and “Bin Laden Planning High Profile Attacks.” The exact contents of these briefings remain classified. However according to the 9/11 Commission, these briefings increasingly predicted upcoming attacks that would occur “on a catastrophic level, indicating that they would cause the world to be in turmoil, consisting of possible multiple – but not necessarily simultaneous – attacks.”(103)

•July 16, 2001: British Prime Minister Tony Blair received a report from British spy agencies, warning that al Qaeda was in “the final stages” of preparing an attack on the United States. This report was “based on intelligence gleaned not just from [British intelligence] but also from US agencies, including the CIA and the National Security Agency.”(104)

•August, 2001: Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered his intelligence agencies to warn the US that suicide pilots were training for attacks on targets within the United States.(105)

• August 6, 2001: President Bush received his now-infamous PDB, “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” According to the New York Times, President Bush “broke off from work early and spent most of that day fishing.”(106)

•September 6-10, 2001: Alarm bells sound at the New York Stock Exchange when unusually high numbers of “put options” are placed on American Airlines and United Airlines stocks. A put option is a contract locking in the selling price of a given stock for a set period of time, so should the value of that stock fall the contract holder can sell that stock at the set price, even if purchased at a lower price after it fell. The put options placed on United Airlines and American Airlines stocks (Flights 175 and 93 were United Airlines, and Flights 11 and 77 were American Airlines) in the days prior to 9/11 were up to 285 times their average.(107) “To the embarrassment of investigators, it has also emerged that the firm used to buy many of the ‘put’ options ... on United Airlines stock was headed until 1998 by ‘Buzzy’ Krongard, now executive director of the CIA.”(108)

These are but a few of the hundreds of examples exposed by researchers and the press; there are, no doubt, many more that have not been revealed.

The question one is often confronted with upon seeing the above or any of the multitude of similar missed warning signs is this: Could all 16 branches of the intelligence community, the Bush administration, and even the President himself actually have been as diligent as they claim to have been and concluded, after the events of 9/11, that “Based on everything I’ve seen, I do not believe anyone could have prevented the horror of September the 11th.”?(109)

It is difficult to accept such widespread and cavalier incompetence from the leadership of greatest nation on Earth with the most advanced intelligence network in history. But if not gross incompetence, what is the alternative? Either they did not know an attack was eminent (and how could they not?), or they did know. And everything that implies.

LARRY SILVERSTEIN AND WTC7

For many people who believe the U.S. was behind the attacks on 9/11, the most clear-cut and damning evidence is the apparent controlled demolition of the Twin Towers (see Part I). Of particular note to these "CDers" is the fact that at approximately 5:20 pm on September 11, the 47-story Building 7 ¨C which had not been struck by an airplane ¨C also collapsed into its own footprint at nearly freefall speed, when the only apparent damage was a 20-story section of the south-west corner caused by falling debris, and two small fires in the lower levels. (110)

When the video record of this collapse is analyzed, it is clear that the collapse actually begins at the top (the penthouse is the fist part of the structure to give way), the entire building sags in the middle, and produces pyroclastic dust clouds, exactly like the Twin Towers.(111) Yet damage to Building 7 was minimal compared to other buildings in the complex which did not collapse. This strongly suggests that controlled demolition of the same order as the Twin Towers was used to bring down WTC7.

But while many believe that the "obvious" physical evidence of controlled demolition of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 is the best argument for official complicity, those who reject this evidence point out what is, at first glance, conspicuously absent: motive and opportunity.

Opportunity: Rigging a building for traditional industrial controlled demolition requires months of preparation, including wiring all of the explosive charges. How could this have been accomplished?

Motive: What would anybody gain from demolishing one of the richest and most well-known businesses and banking centers in the world?

Let's take a closer look.

Larry Silverstein, 72, is the owner of Silverstein Properties, Inc., a real estate investment and development company that has consummated in excess of eight billion dollars in transactions since it’s formation in 1957.(112) Just seven weeks prior to September 11, 2001, Silverstein acquired a 99-year lease from the New York City Port Authority for the entire World Trade Center Complex. This is the first time in the buildings’ 31-year history that the complex changed ownership. Of the $3.2 billion lease, Larry Silverstein put up only $14 million of his own money, borrowing the rest.(113)

There are a number of points of interest regarding this transaction. The lease specified that Silverstein would have the right to rebuild the structures “should they be destroyed.”(114) Silverstein also took out an insurance policy on the complex explicitly in case of terrorist attack. After September 11, Silverstein won a lawsuit filed against the insurance carriers – arguing that the collisions of AA 11 and UA 175 constituted two separate terrorist events – enabling Silverstein to collect a total $4.6 billion in insurance payoffs.(115)

Upon taking over ownership of the World Trade Center Complex, Silverstein hired Kroll, Inc.(116) to manage security. Kroll, Inc. was not new to WTC Security; immediately after the 1993 bombing, the Port Authority hired Kroll, Inc. to analyze the entire WTC Complex and design a new comprehensive security system at a cost of $50 million. These security upgrades included a complete rewiring of the entire complex with both copper wire and fiber optics, and the company that was hired to integrate these systems was Securacom.(117) At that time Marvin Bush, the current President’s brother, joined Securacom’s board of directors. (Securacom also handled security for Dulles International Airport, where AA 77 took off on 9/11).(118)

For many, this conspicuous involvement of the Bush family directly in the security of the World Trade Center is enough to satisfy the "opportunity" aspect of the CD theory. However this evidence is hardly damning. Kroll, Inc. is the real story, here.

Known infamously as a “private CIA,” Kroll, Inc. is a multi-national security company employing thousands of ex-CIA, FBI, and Special Forces people as well as forensics, data recovery, and criminal law specialists.(119) Self-described as “the world’s foremost independent risk consulting company,”(120) Kroll has one division, O'Gara-Hess & Eisenhardt, which has provided mobile security to every US President since 1945.(121) Kroll, Inc. is a subsidiary of the American International Group (AIG) the world’s largest insurance company, along with Marsh McLennan (a “global professional services” firm) and ACE Financial Solutions – all of which are owned and run by members of the Greenberg Family, many of whom serve on the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The Greenbergs have some startling connections to the Bush family, most notably through the Miami-based law firm, Greenberg Traurig, LLP:(122)

• The Greenbergs personally represent Florida Governor, Jeb Bush.

• Greenberg Traurig, LLP represented George W. Bush in Bush v Gore.

• On Election Day 2000 Greenberg Traurig hired the son of Supreme Court Justice, Antonin Scalia, who then cast one of the five-to-four deciding votes which gave the presidency to George W. Bush.

• The Greenbergs partially funded and sponsored a delegation of House-Senate Armed Services Committee members and government contractors to Israel to study torture techniques and interrogations resistance procedures.

• Greenberg Traurig works with 9/11 victims’ families to receive their reparations by preparing the paperwork by which the families agree never to sue the US government for any reason.

The three Greenberg companies, AIG, Marsh and ACE, were the original insurers of the World Trade Center Complex, however before 9/11 they sold off the contracts to their competition (a technique known as “reinsuring”). An odd move for “the world’s largest insurance company” who clearly had the resources to cover this massive policy, except that when the towers fell and Silverstein sued for the insurance payoff, these reinsurers were left holding the bag.

As for the alleged demolition of the towers and Building 7, it is not at all inconceivable that several of Kroll’s military holdings would be able to provide both the expertise and the technology to demolish the buildings. We know Kroll was paid millions to study the entire complex down to the smallest bolt, and that Securacom (and Marvin Bush) was hired to rewire the buildings and install all-new equipment in 1997.(123) Although no hard evidence has been presented to support this, it is possible that the towers and Building 7 could have been prepped and wired for demolition at this time. Explosives would have to have been installed later, as they degrade over time.

It has been widely reported that in the days before 9/11 different sections of the towers were “powered down” for cabling upgrades.(124) During these power downs, security cameras were inoperative, as were electronic security locks. It was also reported that on the Thursday before 9/11, the bomb-sniffing dogs used by WTC security were abruptly removed from duty.(125)

This would conceivably satisfy the issue of opportunity. But what about motive?

Before 9/11 the Twin Towers were a growing financial liability; vacancies were increasing, the structures themselves were 30 years out-of-date, and having commenced construction before 1970 they contained 300-400 tons of asbestos.(126) One is moved to wonder why Larry Silverstein was so eager to take over the lease. From a business standpoint it could be argued that the wisest financial move would have been to dismantle the towers and build something else. In fact it has been reported that some years prior to 2001 the Port Authority had received orders from the EPA to have the buildings completely dismantled by 2007.(127) However due to the presence of asbestos, demolition using explosives would have been illegal, and dismantling the towers beam-by-beam would have cost many billions of dollars – an estimated $2.6 billion just to construct the scaffolding. Kroll would have known the disposition of the towers when they studied them after 1993, and Silverstein would have learned of the EPA’s order through full disclosure during the real estate transaction transferring ownership of the towers to him, if not sooner.

Building 7 had its own dark history. Silverstein owned it outright; an affiliate of Silverstein Properties, Inc. built 7 World Trade Center in 1987.(128) Organizations with offices in Building 7 included the CIA, the Defense Department, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, The United States Secret Service, the Internal Revenue Service, and the Mayor’s Office of Emergency Management. Jeremy Hauer, a Managing Director at Kroll, Inc., assisted with the design and construction of the OEM “bunker” and Kroll, Inc. managed it.(129) This 50,000 square foot center had bulletproof windows, bomb-resistant walls, its own water, power, and air supplies, and a 6,000 gallon fuel tank in violation of city fire codes. It also had banks of surveillance equipment tied into the police and fire departments.(130) Some conspiracy theorists have speculated that this bunker was the command center for coordinating the 9/11 attacks, including the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers – despite the fact that no solid evidence in support of this theory has been forthcoming.

One result of the collapse of WTC7 is the loss of records by the Securities and Exchange Office, who had a number of rich companies under investigation.(131) The resultant dismissal of these cases would save these companies millions if not billions in fines or reparations. Another office in WTC7 which lost a great deal of valuable paperwork was the CIA’s counterterrorism and counterintelligence office.(132) Could this office have had hard evidence which would have contradicted the Bush Administration’s allegations during its push to go to war in the Middle East?

There certainly appears to have been sufficient motive to destroy WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7.

Oh, and before we leave this subject, one more little detail. Jeremy Hauer of Kroll, Inc., mentioned above, is the same man who hired the WTC’s new Chief of Security shortly before 9/11 – Former FBI agent, John P. O’Neill. Mr. O’Neill had been a top anti-terrorism expert who had focused primarily on al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, and was a key investigator into the bombing of the USS Cole by al Qaeda.(133) O’Neill resigned after 25 years with the FBI when he was passed over for a promotion to the National Security Council due to an investigation over a misplaced briefcase – a trivial incident then over a year old.(134) John O’Neill moved into his new office in the North Tower of the WTC on September 10, 2001, where he perished the following day.

NORAD’S FAILURE TO RESPOND

The United States (jointly with Canada) has a highly sophisticated military air defense system in place, known as the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD.(135) Founded in 1958, NORAD consists of Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment or ITW/AA (continent-wide surveillance, assessment and notification of manmade objects in space) and Aerospace Control (Canadian CF-18 and US F-15 and F16 fighters and associated personnel in bases throughout Canadian, US and Alaskan zones). NORAD also has the authority to order units from other armed services, including the Air Force, and the Air National Guard.

NORAD's standard operating procedure (SOP) when any aircraft a) goes off course, b) loses radio contact, c) loses it transponder signal, or d) disappears from radar, is to scramble fighter jets from the nearest base – fighter jets that are prepped and ready for combat 24/7/365 – which then intercept the aircraft in question and attempt to establish contact with the pilot and render assistance, escort it to a safe landing, or if necessary, shoot it down to prevent it from crashing in a populated area. In the year 2000, NORAD scrambled jets 129 times.(136)

But On September 11, 2001, NORAD did not follow long-standing standard operating procedures. In fact, in order to have failed at the level it did on 9/11, several layers of redundancy had to all fail simultaneously – which is unprecedented in the history of NORAD.

Those levels of failure include:

 Reporting: The FAA report times of flight deviations to NORAD were several times longer than the prescribed times.

 Scrambling: NORAD, once notified, did not scramble jets from the nearest bases.

 Intercepting: Interceptors, once airborne, flew at only a fraction of top speed to reach their targets.

 Redeploying: Fighters already airborne and within range of targets were not redeployed to pursue them.

Let's look at these layers of failure in turn.

Failures to Report:

According to NORAD’s timeline,(137) the FAA failed to notify them about Flight 11 until 8:40 am, 25 minutes after the first signs of trouble and 16 minutes after receiving the following transmission:

“We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you’ll be okay … Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you’ll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet.” (138)

Also according to NORAD’s own official timeline, the FAA did not notify them about Flight 77 until 34 minutes after loss of radio contact and 21 minutes after both towers had already been struck – and Flight 77 had already made a 180° turn and was headed directly for Washington, D.C. In fact the FAA didn’t notify NORAD about Flight 77 until 9:24 am – just 13 minutes before it struck the Pentagon.(139)

Failures to Scramble and Intercept:

In fact, upon notification, NORAD scrambled fighters quite swiftly. However, inexplicably, in each case those fighters were scrambled not from the closest bases to either the planes or their apparent targets, but from distant bases:

New York – the first base to scramble interceptors was Otis in Falmouth, Massachusetts, eight minutes after Flight 11 already hit the North Tower and only nine minutes before Flight 175 would hit the South Tower. Otis is 153 miles from the WTC, but Atlantic City, La Guardia and Langley, Virginia are all closer. The planes from Otis finally reached the WTC 19 minutes later. This means they were flying at around 25% of their top speed of 1875 mph. At their top speed, those planes could have reached the WTC in less than five minutes – four minutes before Flight 175 struck the South Tower.(140)

Washington, D.C. – Andrews Air Force Base is charged with protecting the capital and had two squadrons of fighters on alert. Andrews is just over ten miles from the Pentagon. Yet NORAD scrambled interceptors from Langley instead, which is 130 miles away. The Langley F-16s reached the Pentagon at 9:49 am – 12 minutes after Flight 77 crashed. They were airborne at 8:30, and at their top speed of 1500 mph they could have reached the Pentagon two minutes before Flight 77 did. Fighters from Andrews were eventually scrambled – after the Pentagon had been struck.(141)

Failures to Redeploy:

When the two F-15’s from Otis finally reached Manhattan – too late – Flight 77, flying with its transponder off, had executed a 180 degree turn and had been flying toward Washington, D.C. for 12 minutes. If they had been redeployed – as is the SOP – they could have flown the 300 miles to the Pentagon in less than 10 minutes.(142)

What could have caused the world’s most sophisticated air-defense system, which worked perfectly up to September 11th, 2001, to fail so thoroughly on the day four airplanes were hijacked and used as weapons – precisely the sort of occurrence NORAD’s equipment, command structure and personnel were designed and trained to deal with? Did they become suddenly incompetent? Or were they following orders?

As part of his responsibilities heading the new “terrorism task force,”(143) Vice President Dick Chaney had the job of coordinating all military war games and terror exercises.(144) In fact, it can be convincingly argued that Cheney was the acting Commander and Chief on 9/11.

When the first plane struck the World Trade Center at 8:46 am, President Bush was en route to his photo-op at a Florida elementary school.(145) He continued his scheduled appearance, even after being informed by his Chief of Staff, Andrew Card, “A second plane hit the other tower, and America’s under attack.”(146) President Bush remained in the classroom, listening to the children read, then worked on the speech he would later give in the school’s auditorium, where he announced “… an apparent terrorist attack against our country.” It was not until 9:34 am, 30 minutes after Flight 175 struck the South Tower and it was clear that the nation was under attack – during which time possibly several but certainly two additional planes had been hijacked and might be used as weapons – that the Secret Service finally rushed the President from his publicized and very public location.(147)

In contrast, Secret Service agents “burst” into the Vice President’s office almost immediately after the first plane struck, and escorted him to the underground Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC), where he coordinated the nation’s response to the attacks.(148)

It was at this location and time that the Vice President relayed the President’s shoot down authorization to fighters in the air, although the exact timing of this event varies between eyewitness accounts and Cheney’s own account. According to Richard Clarke, this order came before Flight 93 crashed(149) (which speculators say is corroborated by eyewitness accounts of a white military jet in the air above Shanksville immediately before and after the crash of Flight 93(150)). It was also here that Transportation Secretary, Norman Mineta, overheard a conversation between the Vice President and an aide regarding the approach of Flight 77 to the Pentagon:

“There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, ‘The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out.’ And when it got down to, ‘The plane is 10 miles out,’ the young man also said to the vice president, ‘Do the orders still stand?’ And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, ‘Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?’ ” [Testimony before the 9/11 Commission](151)

As we have already seen, it was possible for interceptors from several locations to have reached the Pentagon had they been traveling at top speed and under orders to shoot down the hijacked plane. But since no fighters arrived until after the Pentagon was struck, the “order” mentioned in Mineta’s testimony must not have been to shoot down Flight 77. What other order could Cheney have given regarding the handling of Flight 77 – when standard operating procedure would have had fighters from Andrews Air Force Base engage Flight 77 long before it reached Washington, D.C.? Many believe the order was to “stand down.”

Before you dismiss this notion out-of-hand, consider the following. One, two, or even three failures in the FAA’s and NORAD’s response to the attacks on 9/11 could be forgiven. But even three failures would not have been enough to prevent them from intercepting and engaging at least three of the four planes. Some other mechanism must have been at work to prevent several redundant layers of SOP from operating.

It has recently come to light that in the days preceding and on the day of September 11th, at least six different (and possibly more) military training operations were under way simultaneously. Remember, Vice President Cheney had been given command of these operations months earlier. Here is a breakdown of some of those exercises:

● Operation Northern Vigilance. NORAD deployed fighters to Alaska and Northern Canada to monitor Russian air force exercises, starting on September 10th and scheduled to end on September 14th.(152) However, upon learning of the 9/11 attacks, Russian President Putin voluntarily cancelled the operation.(153) After this, NORAD purged the “false blips” it had injected into the system as part of the simulation.(154) This exercise (and others) likely accounted for the fact that as many as 29 hijacked planes showed on the radar screens on September 11th, adding to the confusion.(155)

● Vigilant Guardian. This week-long exercise involving all of NORAD is described as “an exercise that would pose an imaginary crisis to North American Air Defense outposts nationwide.” So when Boston flight control first contacted NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) about Flight 11, personnel on duty believe it to be part of the exercise. Major Kevin Nasypany declares, “The hijack’s not supposed to be for another hour.”(156) NEADS’ response time is clearly affected by the confusion.

● Global Guardian. Sponsored by U.S. Strategic Command (Stratcom) in cooperation with U.S. Space Command and NORAD, this routinely-staged global readiness exercise is commonly called a “practice Armageddon.” However, it is typically staged in October or November. On September 11th, “dozens of aircraft and hundreds of personnel” were engaged in the operation.(157)

● Crown Vigilance, Apollo Guardian and Amalgam Warrior. These independent military exercises conducted by Air Combat Command, U.S. Space Command and NORAD were all linked with other exercises sponsored by the Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Unified Commands under the umbrella of Global Guardian.(158)

As a direct result of these exercises, most of NORAD’s U.S. fleet – as well as other air defense forces – were well out of range or out-of-service and effectively out of commission on the morning of 9/11. Only a handful of NORAD fighters were on alert when the four planes were hijacked.(159) The question being pondered by many is this: Which is more likely? 1) that Osama bin Laden knew of our plans to schedule an unusually high number of war games on 9/11, and that his many years of planning serendipitously coincided with that perfect window of opportunity? Or 2) that certain people knew an attack was eminent, wanted it to succeed (for reasons I will discuss in Part III), and made every effort to help it succeed?

Without a full, independent, omni-partisan and unhindered investigation into the truth about 9/11, we may never have enough facts to answer that question conclusively. Until then, one can only try to put aside personal bias and weigh the evidence on its own merits.

THE 9/11 “OMISSION” REPORT

After any significant tragedy or other major event that raises questions, the government response is – and always has been – to mount an immediate investigation, unleashing the full weight of the intelligence community to find definitive answers to all questions and create the framework for preventing anything similar from ever happening again.

For example, when President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22nd, 1963, the Warren Commission was established on November 29th at a cost of $32 million (in adjusted 2003 dollars).(160) The Whitewater investigation into the Clintons’ finances in 1993 cost $70 million and lasted 12 years.(161) In 2003 when the Columbia Shuttle burned up on re-entry, the initial investigation began within hours and was approved with a budget of $50 million, later increased by an additional $305 million for FEMA to search for debris.(162)

By contrast the investigation into the attack on America on September 11, 2001 was not begun until 2003 and was given a budget of only $3 million, later increased to $12 million.(163) This is largely because President Bush himself resisted forming an investigation for over a year,(164) unashamedly claiming that to do so might reveal sensitive intelligence-gathering methods. However he finally buckled under pressure from the 9/11 Family Steering Committee.

The 9/11 Family Steering Committee was formed largely due to the effort of four widows from New Jersey, Kristen Breitweiser, Patty Casazza, Lorie Van Auken and Mindy Kleinberg, who had in common the fact that each of them had been married to men who had died in the terrorist attacks of 9/11. These four women are more commonly known as the Jersey Girls. Of the Jersey Girls, 9/11 Commission Chairman, Thomas Kean said, “They monitor us, they follow our progress, they've provided us with some of the best questions we've asked. I doubt very much if we would be in existence without them.”(165)

However before agreeing to allow an independent investigation into 9/11, President Bush insisted on appointing the committee’s chair, which immediately raised concerns about the true independence of the commission. In fact Bush originally appointed Henry Kissinger, but Van Auken asked him during a meeting in his office, “Do you happen to have any clients by the name bin Laden?” Kissinger resigned the next day.(166) In his place Bush appointed Thomas Kean, who has his own ties to bin Laden, through business partners Khalid Bin Mahfouz (Osama's brother in law, according to CIA sources), and Mohammed Hussein al Amoudi – both alleged financiers of Al Qaeda. Also assigned by Bush was the commission’s executive director, Philipp Zelikow, who was already on the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board and had a ten-year professional relationship with Condoleezza Rice during which time they co-authored a book on foreign politics.(167)

Even after it had been formed, the commission was plagued with roadblocks and intentional denial of key evidence:

● A fraction of the required budget and a very short time I which to complete a thorough report.(168)

● President Bush and Vice President Cheney would only agree to meet with the commission 1) together, 2) not under oath, 3) without any recording devices other than paper and pencil, and 4) with the agreement that those notes would never be published.(169)

● Taped interviews with FAA air traffic controllers on duty on 9/11 – recorded just hours after the planes had crashed – were destroyed before the 9/11 Commission could hear them, crushed, cut into small pieces and distributed in several trash cans.(170)

● Despite the commonly-known fact that it is illegal to remove evidence from a crime scene, virtually all of the debris from the World Trade Center was carted away to landfills, and the steel loaded onto barges and shipped overseas to foreign scrap dealers before it could be examined by forensics specialists.(171)

● While the final 9/11 Commission report claims none of the four aviation black boxes (two per airliner) at the WTC were ever found, firefighter testimony suggests at least three of them were located in the rubble.(172)

In fact, “omission” might be the hallmark of the 9/11 Commission Report. While the report states that its mandate was to be “independent, impartial and thorough” it is clear that it was none of these things. Key members were in the President’s cabinet or had ties to bin Laden, and were therefore biased in favor of the official story. Moreover, far from being thorough, the commission’s scope was limited to the question of how to prevent future breakdowns as those that presumably occurred on 9/11 – and not the question of how the attacks occurred or who was responsible for them.

Perhaps the most popular book on the subject of the 9/11 Commission's shortcomings is Dr. David Ray Griffin, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions. (173) Here is an abbreviated list of the more egregious omissions from The 9/11 Commission Report, compiled by Dr. Griffin (174):

● The omission of evidence that at least six of the alleged hijackers — including Waleed al-Shehri, said by the Commission probably to have stabbed a flight attendant on Flight 11 before it crashed into the North Tower of the WTC — are still alive.

● The omission of the fact that fire has never, before or after 9/11, caused steel-frame buildings to collapse.

● The omission of the fact that WTC 7 (which was not hit by an airplane and which had only small, localized fires) also collapsed — an occurrence that FEMA admitted it could not explain.

● The omission of the fact that the collapse of the Twin Towers (like that of Building 7) exemplified at least 10 features suggestive of controlled demolition.

● The omission of all testimony that has been used to cast doubt on whether remains of a Boeing 757 were visible either inside or outside the Pentagon.

● The omission of any discussion of whether the Pentagon has an anti-missile defense system that would have brought down a commercial airliner — even though the Commission suggested that the al-Qaeda terrorists did not attack a nuclear power plant because they assumed that it would be thus defended.

● The omission of the fact that pictures from various security cameras — including the camera at the gas station across from the Pentagon, the film from which was reportedly confiscated by the FBI immediately after the strike — could presumably answer the question of what really hit the Pentagon.

● The omission of the report that Attorney General Ashcroft was warned to stop using commercial airlines prior to 9/11, and that both Mayor Willie Brown and some Pentagon officials received warnings about flying on 9/11.

● The omission of any mention of the FBI agents who reportedly claimed to have known the targets and dates of the attacks well in advance.

● The omission of the report that Osama bin Laden, who already was America’s “most wanted” criminal, was treated in July 2001 by an American doctor in the American Hospital in Dubai and visited by the local CIA agent.

● The omission of the fact that President Bush and other members of his administration repeatedly spoke of the 9/11 attacks as “opportunities.”

● The omission of the fact that The Project for the New American Century, many members of which became key figures in the Bush administration, published a document in 2000 saying that “a new Pearl Harbor” would aid its goal of obtaining funding for a rapid technological transformation of the U.S. military.

● The omission of the report that at a meeting in July 2001, U.S. representatives said that because the Taliban refused to agree to a U.S. proposal that would allow the pipeline project to go forward, a war against them would begin by October.

● The omission of notes of Rumsfeld’s conversations on 9/11 showing that he was determined to use the attacks as a pretext for a war with Iraq.

● The omission of any explanation of (a) why NORAD’s earlier report, according to which the FAA had notified the military about the hijacking of Flight 175 at 8:43, was now to be considered false and (b) how this report, if it was false, could have been published and then left uncorrected for almost three years.

● The omission of the fact that a memo by Laura Brown of the FAA says that its teleconference was established at about 8:50 and that it included discussion of Flight 175’s hijacking.

● The omission of Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta’s testimony, given to the Commission itself, that Vice-President Cheney and others in the underground shelter were aware by 9:26 that an aircraft was approaching the Pentagon.

● The omission of all the evidence suggesting that the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77.

● The omission of all the evidence indicating that Flight 93 was shot down by a military plane.

● The omission of Clarke’s own testimony, which suggests that he received the shoot-down authorization by 9:50.

● The omission of multiple testimonies, including that of Norman Mineta to the Commission itself, that Cheney was in the PEOC before 9:20.

● The omission of reports that Colonel Marr ordered a shoot-down of Flight 93 and that General Winfield indicated that he and others at the NMCC had expected a fighter jet to reach Flight 93.

● The omission of evidence that there were at least six bases with fighters on alert in the northeastern part of the United States.

● The failure to probe the issue of how the “war games” scheduled for that day were related to the military’s failure to intercept the hijacked airliners.

● The failure to point out that the White House first sought to prevent the creation of a 9/11 Commission, then placed many obstacles in its path, including giving it extremely meager funding.

With all of these omissions it is clearly impossible to characterize the 9/11 Commission Report as “thorough.” But perhaps the quality of the report we ultimately got(175) is to be expected when the administration budgeted only $12 million. Isn’t it ironic that this is less than one tenth the amount of money this administration spends per day in the war it used 9/11 to promote (Iraqi Freedom fiscal year 2003: $53 billion / 365 days = $139.7 million)(176)?

IN THEIR OWN WORDS

Perhaps the best argument for official complicity by our government in the attacks of September 11, 2001 or in it’s the failure to respond is the words of our highest-ranking officials themselves:

“It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it's physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we're talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building [the Pentagon] and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center.”(177)
-- Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld

"I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon, the people who cut off peoples' heads on television to intimidate, to frighten – indeed the word 'terrorized' is just that. Its purpose is to terrorize, to alter behavior, to make people be something other than that which they want to be."(178)
-- Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld

"The Secret Service has an arrangement with the FAA. They had open lines after the World Trade Center was ....” [at which point he stopped himself before finishing the sentence](179)
-- Vice President, Dick Cheney

“For example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned [9/11] attacks of buildings inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out. That is valuable information for those of us who have the responsibility to protect the American people. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high – a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping.”(180)
-- President, George W. Bush

"I don't know where [Osama bin Laden] is and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."(181)
-- President, George W. Bush

“See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.”(182)
-- President, George W. Bush

John Berkowitz is a Publications Director, graphic designer, writer, and independent investigator intent on spreading the truth about 9/11. He lives in Northern California with his wife and two children. He can be reached at john@spontinuity.com

For your reading pleasure you may download this PDF and pass it around. To get it go hereTruth About 9/11 PDF

Notes: