COINTELPRO and the 9-11 Movement – A Special Report by Visibility 9-11

EDITOR’S NOTE: Much of the information in this page was originally published in the October 2007 Visibility 9-11 Newsletter. Unfortunately due to time restraints, the newsletter was only produced for 3 months. However, the content here is too valuable to not have it’s own prominent place at this website. Therefore, the content with information regarding COINTELPRO, is reproduced on this page.

Dear Friends,

This month I am sending out a big THANK YOU to all the researchers and activists who have contributed so much in their self-less time and energy toward bringing the light of truth to bear on the 9-11 cover-up. Our numbers continue to grow and our influence is being more and more felt across our nation as ordinary folks begin to think the unthinkable; that 9-11 was orchestrated by rogue elements within the highest levels of our own government in order to bring about a police state here in America and to wage endless, perpetual war on a new and faceless boogie man. Make no mistake about it, we are having an effect. There are many indications that tell us this is true.

One clue to support this assertion is the number of hit pieces produced for the mainstream media which attempt to “debunk” the 9-11 Movement. Millions of dollars have been spent to counter all of our work and we should be proud knowing that none of this would have been necessary for the powers that be were it not for our work in bringing light to truth.

Other clues are out there but are more difficult to see and sort out. These clues revolve around the fact that our movement has been infiltrated at all levels by what appears to be an organized and orchestrated effort to discredit us and our work. This sort of tactic is really nothing new when it comes to our corrupt government. In fact, crimes against the Constitution by the tax payer funded intelligence agencies of America have been well documented in our country’s recent history.

We would all be extremely naive if we fail to recognize that those responsible for 9-11 will spare no expense to keep the truth about what really happened on September 11th, 2001 from ever being revealed, for when that happens, they know their jig is up. As 9-11 activists, we all need to learn about the tactics and methods which are being used against us. Disinformation, misinformation, and outright attacks on hard working 9-11 and peace activists are all being used RIGHT NOW in order to discredit us, divide us, destroy our work, and eventually conquer us. We must not let this happen or we risk losing everything; our country, our lives, and our future as a free people.

In order to secure the success of our efforts, we must first become aware of, and then take the necessary steps to ensure that you are not unwittingly participating in the campaign against us. Disinformation quickly spreads as misinformation by well meaning and good people. Once you learn what disinformation is and the effect it has on any movement, you can identify it, and then remove it from your talking points, film screenings, and public meetings. This does not make you a gatekeeper! It makes you a careful and thoughtful activist who researches what he/she presents as “9-11 Truth”. A campaign of education is absolutely necessary and we must all actively work to educate others about these efforts to discredit and divide us.

With that said, the bulk of this month’s newsletter is devoted to education about what COINTELPRO is, its manifestations, and how we can nullify its effects. In early 2007, I recognized this need when I produced a short series of programs which became my Special Report on COINTELPRO. This series is even more relevant today. That can also be said about the links to the important information throughout this month’s newsletter. With our eyes wide open, and with help from each other, we can disrupt the disruption.

Thank you.
Michael Wolsey

###

9/11 Truth and Division: Disinformation, Agent Provocateurs, and False Adversaries

By Arabesque

The subject of this essay is divisive. In fact, it’s about divisiveness. In response to the problem of divisive posts at 911blogger, Reprehensor wrote:

911blogger.com has been used as a tool to identify and amplify wedge issues that divide 9/11 skeptics and researchers, and this has occurred primarily in the comments area.” [1]

Why do people attack each other? There are many reasons, and most of them are irrational. Others attack deliberately. Does this happen in the 9/11 truth movement? In fact, divide and conquer was an intentional strategy used by the OSS during World War II: [2]

“Psychological warfare, as the term is used by the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff … comprises all moral and physical means other than orthodox military operations which tend to destroy the will and ability of the enemy to resist, to deprive him of support of allies or neutrals and to increase in our own troops and allies the will to victory. The implements of psychological warfare are: open propaganda, subversion, special operations (sabotage, guerrilla warfare, espionage), political and cultural pressures, economic pressures. The principal effects sought are persuasion, sympathy, terrorization, confusion, division and physical interference.” [3]

From historical examples and COINTELPRO, we should not rule out the possibility that this tactic could be used against current day activists. [4] Having this problem in mind, Barrie Zwicker commented about possible disinformation and infiltration within the 9/11 truth movement:

“What’s needed is politically relevant education. Education about agents of all kinds, especially agents provocateurs, their history, who employs them, their tactics… While educating ourselves and others we can simultaneously actively combat agents of the state by refraining from engaging in the types of behaviour they employ to sow dissention: name-calling, rumour-mongering, insinuation. Especially specific name-calling. Refraining from this does not stifle vigorous discussion and debate, based on observable facts, statements and patterns. Education drains the swamp. Most of agents will stand out. It’s happening already. Other agents are deeper. Understanding their purposes and identifying them and dealing with them depends on more education yet.” [5]

Read the rest of this article here.

###

9-11 Synthetic Error – The meltdown of Webster G. Tarpley

By Michael Wolsey

“In our movement there has to be a sphere of theoretical discussion, which has to be done in a business-like and respectful manner, without slander, without defamation, without ad hominem attacks on every page.”
Originally broadcast on World Crisis Radio with Webster Tarpley, Sept. 9, 2006.

John Leonard, who as far as I can tell is the publisher of Webster G. Tarpley’s book, 9/11Synthetic Terror, Made in the USA, posted a blog entry at 911blogger.com dated September 6th, 2007 and titled Tarpley’s Rx for US 9/11 Truth Movement: Diversity and Civility in Discussion, Unity in Action. As you can see from the above quote attributed to Mr. Tarpley, he is asking the 9-11 movement to conduct themselves in a “business-like and respectful manner, without slander, without defamation, without ad hominem attacks on every page.”

I agree wholeheartedly with the above statement by Mr. Tarpley. I have been aware of the divisions within the 9-11 movement for years now and know that they have slowed our progress toward the truth behind the events of September 11th. We do need to come together around the best possible evidence we have and get behind the best researchers to keep propelling our 9-11 questions to the forefront of the public eye. So I was a bit surprised to find out that the very day that this article surfaced at 911blogger.com, Webster Tarpley was publicly attacking me, Cosmos, Col. Jenny Sparks, Jon Gold, and Arabesque on his radio program GCN World report. In order to understand better what prompted this attack, it is important to step back in time and examine the circumstances surrounding the emergence of what is known as “The Kennebunkport Warning”, hereafter known in this article as the KW. It is also worth a look at Mr. Tarpley himself and what he believes and advocates.

Read the rest of this article here.

###

COINTELPRO Revisited – Spying & Disruption

by Brian Glick

INTRODUCTION
Activists across the country report increasing government harassment and disruption of their work:

  • In the Southwest, paid informers infiltrate the church services, Bible classes and support networks of clergy and lay workers giving sanctuary to refugees from El Salvador and Guatemala.
  • In Alabama, elderly Black people attempting for the first time to exercise their right to vote are interrogated by FBI agents and hauled before federal grand juries hundreds of miles from their homes.
  • In New England, a former CIA case officer cites examples from his own past work to warn college students of efforts by undercover operatives to misdirect and discredit protests against South African and US racism.
  • In the San Francisco Bay Area, activists planning anti-nuclear civil disobedience learn that their meetings have been infiltrated by the US Navy.
  • In Detroit, Seattle, and Philadelphia, in Cambridge, MA, Berkeley,CA., Phoenix, AR., and Washington, DC., churches and organizations opposing US policies in Central America report obviously political break-ins in which important papers are stolen or damaged, while money and valuables are left untouched. License plates on a car spotted fleeing one such office have been traced to the US National Security Agency.
  • In Puerto Rico, Texas and Massachusetts, labor leaders, community organizers, writers and editors who advocate Puerto Rican independence are branded by the FBI as “terrorists,” brutally rounded-up in the middle of the night, held incommunicado for days and then jailed under new preventive detention laws.
  • The FBI puts the same “terrorist” label on opponents of US intervention in El Salvador, but refuses to investigate the possibility of a political conspiracy behind nation-wide bombings of abortion clinics.
  • Throughout the country, people attempting to see Nicaragua for themselves find their trips disrupted, their private papers confiscated, and their homes and offices plagued by FBI agents who demand detailed personal and political information.

These kinds of government tactics violate our fundamental constitutional rights. They make it enormously difficult to sustain grass-roots organizing. They create an atmosphere of fear and distrust which undermines any effort to challenge official policy.

Similar measures were used in the 1960s as part of a secret FBI program known as “COINTELPRO.” COINTELPRO was later exposed and officially ended. But the evidence shows that it actually persisted and that clandestine operations to discredit and disrupt opposition movements have become an institutional feature of national and local government in the US. This pamphlet is designed to help current and future activists learn from the history of COINTELPRO, so that our movements can better withstand such attack.

The first section gives a brief overview of what we know the FBI did in the 60s. It explains why we can expect similar government intervention in the 80s and beyond, and offers general guidelines for effective response.

The main body of the pamphlet describes the specific methods which have previously been used to undermine domestic dissent and suggests steps we can take to limit or deflect their impact.

A final chapter explores ways to mobilize broad public protest against this kind of repression.

Further readings and groups that can help are listed in back. The pamphlet’s historical analysis is based on confidential internal documents prepared by the FBI and police during the 60s.

It also draws on the post-60s confessions of disaffected government agents, and on the testimony of public officials before Congress and the courts. Though the information from these sources is incomplete, and much of what was done remains secret, we now know enough to draw useful lessons for future organizing.

The suggestions included in the pamphlet are based on the author’s 20 years experience as an activist and lawyer, and on talks with long-time organizers in a broad range of movements. They are meant to provide starting points for discussion, so we can get ready before the pressure intensifies. Most are a matter of common sense once the methodology of covert action is understood. Please take these issues seriously. Discuss the recommendations with other activists. Adapt them to the conditions you face. Point out problems and suggest other approaches.

It is important that we begin now to protect our movements and ourselves.

Read the rest of this article here.

 

George Orwell and 1984 – A Special Report by Visibility 9-11

EDITOR’S NOTE: Much of the information in this page was originally published in the November 2007 Visibility 9-11 Newsletter. Unfortunately due to time restraints, the newsletter was only produced for 3 months. However, the content here is too valuable to not have it’s own prominent place at this website. Therefore, the content with information regarding George Orwell, 1984, and how it applies to us today, is reproduced on this page.

Dear Friends,

Another month has passed and much has happened, even in the last 30 days to advance the cause for truth surrounding the events of September 11th. Be sure and check 911Blogger every day for all the daily 9-11 related news and happenings. If you don’t have an account there, create one. Then you can host your own blog and post 9-11 related information that you either create or come across. With many visitors/bloggers contributing, it can better be insured that nothing important will get by us. It’s a team effort and thanks to the 911Blogger team and all of its contributors!

Each month brings us closer and closer to our goal of realizing a new and truly independent investigation which will hold those responsible for their crimes, not only those crimes of 9-11 itself, but the crimes of the cover-up of 9-11, the subsequent assault on our freedoms, and the lies and un-Constitutional wars we have been dragged into. More and more activists are carrying the torch of 9-11 truth and are becoming educated and aware of just how out of control our government really is. All across the country, and indeed the world, truthers are picking up the banner for 9-11 truth and hitting the streets. Check out the photos of dedicated activists and consider joining them in your town for the 11th of Every Month Action Campaign. Thanks going out to Cosmos and everyone over at truthaction.org!

I recently watched the movie Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell. I have seen the film several times and also read the book and always get something new from watching or reading this work. I highly recommend first, the book, but secondly, the movie is also very well done. As with any book vs. movie, the book is always much better and generally contains far more detail than the movie can provide. This is certainly true in this case…get the book! Perhaps easier than getting the book, you can hear an audio recording of the book here. If you don’t have time or for whatever reason and the book is not an option, you can watch the film production of the book here. Lastly, I put together a program some time ago which consisted of a recording of a radio broadcast from 1948, the year Nineteen Eighty-Four was published, and featured an NBC University Theater production of the work starring David Niven as Winston Smith.

As you look around our world today, after reading Orwell, you cannot help but see this vision taking place before your very eyes. From the perpetual, non-ending war waged by the Ministry of Peace, to the torture emanating from the Ministry of Love, to the prosecution of thought crime by the Thought Police, we see evidence of the methods of control used by Big Brother all around us today. One such Orwellian method of control is vividly illustrated in this month’s newsletter in the article below by Arabesque titled Disinformation and the Misleading and False LIHOP/MIHOP Dichotomy. Albeit subtle and unrecognizable to most people, this article highlights a stunning example of what Orwell called Newspeak.

To better understand how the terms known as LIHOP and MIHOP can be seen as examples of Orwellian Newspeak, it may be helpful to review exactly what Newspeak is to Orwell. In Oceania, where the events in the book take place, Newspeak is the official language of “The Party”. Successive editions of the Newspeak dictionary, rather than getting larger with each edition, got smaller. This was an active and ongoing revision of the language conducted by Big Brother and Ingsoc. Ingsoc is the name of “The Party” ruling over Oceania and itself a Newspeak word meaning “English Socialism”. What is the purpose of Newspeak? To limit individuality by making changes in the language designed to diminish the range of thought, rather than to advance it. By deliberately and gradually eliminating the choice of words, Big Brother could therefore control the people better by eliminating crimethink, the Newspeak word for thought crime. Thought crime was punishable by death in Oceania and Newspeak made it possible to eliminate crimethink by eliminating words in subtle and not so subtle ways. Some words were eliminated altogether; others changed by combining two words, or by using abbreviations and acronyms such as FEMA and Nazi. Speaking of, this use of abbreviations and acronyms is and has been a common tendency of totalitarian regimes.

A real world example of Newspeak can be found in an organization known as Communist International. Just the mere mention of this phrase conjures up images of totalitarianism and all of its manifestations. Want to change people’s perceptions of this organization? Simple. Reference the 11th edition of the Newspeak dictionary and call your organization Cominter. You have effectively removed any thought process that would bring about such negative associations and connotations and for all intents and purposes, changed the language.

Orwell put it best through Winston’s comrade Syme, who worked in the Research Department at the Ministry of Truth, when he spoke about Newspeak saying:

“The Eleventh Edition is the definitive edition. We’re getting the language into its final shape – the shape it’s going to have when nobody speaks anything else. You think our chief job is inventing new words. But not a bit of it! We’re destroying words – scores of them, hundreds of them, every day. We’re cutting the language down to the bone. In the final version of Newspeak there’ll be nothing else. It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words. The great wastage is in the verbs and adjectives, but there are hundreds of nouns that can be got rid of as well. It isn’t only the synonyms; there are also the antonyms. After all what justification is there for a word which is simply the opposite of some other word? A word contains its opposite in itself. Take ‘good’, for instance. If you have a word like ‘good’, what need is there for a word like ‘bad’? ‘Ungood’ will do just as well – better, because it’s an exact opposite, which the other is not. Or again, if you want a stronger version of ‘good’, what sense is there in having a whole string of vague useless words like ‘excellent’ and ‘splendid’ and all the rest of them? ‘Plusgood’ covers the meaning; or ‘doubleplusgood’ if you want something stronger still. In the final version of Newspeak there’ll be nothing else. The whole notion of goodness and badness will be covered by only six words – in reality, only one word.

Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. Every concept that can ever be needed, will be expressed by exactly one word, with its meaning rigidly defined and all its subsidiary meanings rubbed out and forgotten. Every year fewer and fewer words, and the range of consciousness always a little smaller. There’s no reason or excuse for committing thoughtcrime. It’s merely a question of self-discipline, reality-control. The Revolution will be complete when the language is perfect. Newspeak is Ingsoc and Ingsoc is Newspeak.

By the year 2050 – earlier probably – all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron – they’ll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually changed into something contradictory of what they used to be. Even the literature of The Party will change. Even the slogans will change. How could you have a slogan like “freedom is slavery” when the concept of freedom has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking – not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”

The whole process of translating Oldspeak into Newspeak was a conscious effort which combined words into easily spoken utterances which could be rapidly spoken and provoked little to no thought in the mind of the speaker. The intention here is to make speech independent of thought, which is what I see in the use of the terms LIHOP/MIHOP. It is essential to understand that thoughts and ideas harmful to Big Brother, especially political thoughts and ideas had to be unclear in the minds of the party members. Newspeak achieved this by naming these harmful thoughts in broad terms. Again, the LIHOP/MIHOP fit these Orwellian Newspeak tactics of language, and in turn, thought processes.

Newspeak worked because it eliminated countless words such as freedom, honor, justice, religion, and other concepts of liberty and equality and brought them all under the single word crimethink, or thought crime. How could the word freedom be understood if its concept was not even known? Similarly, the concepts of rationalism and objectivity were replaced with the word oldthink, a word that became synonymous with the discarded and undesirable past of individual thought. Using words of greater detail and meaning would have been dangerous to anyone in Oceania.

With all this said, I think it important that we examine the work of George Orwell and have the courage to face the similarities of today head on. It goes without saying that we are not quite where Orwell envisioned us to be in the year 1984, however, much of what Orwell had “predicted” is being manifested before our very eyes today. I encourage everyone to read or listen to the book, and to watch the movie. You will be more enriched as a result and will be able to see things from a different perspective. A healthy study of Orwell is a healthy study of society today and will equip you to better recognize the techniques of control which may be being implemented against our activism and ultimately, our society and way of life.

“If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face …forever.”
— The character O’Brien speaking to Winston Smith, Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Fight Orwell’s vision, or get ready for a boot in your face!

— Michael Wolsey

What Did They Know & When Did They Know It- and What Were They Doing?

Article by Erik Larson
Click here for all the articles in the: 9/11 Truth Overview Series

This article reviews some of US administration’s and defense, intelligence & law enforcement agencies actions in the years and months before 9/11. The public record of government reports and statements so far makes clear that there were many, many warning signs that Al Qaeda was plotting attacks, and that policy makers in these administrations and agencies were aware of this; why didn’t they stop the attacks?

The Bush Administration & Pentagon Policy in 2001: Ignore Terrorist Threats & Plan for War in Iraq & Afghanistan:

Even before taking office, key Bush Administration members were focused on agitating and planning for wars in Iraq (and Afghanistan); when they took office, this was the main priority and they made investigating and fighting terrorism a low priority. In January 2001, the Hart-Rudman bi-partisan report concluded terrorism was a serious threat and made 50 recommendations for combating it, which were ignored. Counterterrorism Tsar Richard Clarke had a comprehensive plan to neutralize, limit and destroy Al Qaeda and actively lobbied for immediate action on some or all of it, but nothing was done until after 9/11. Clarke was kept on from the Clinton administration, but Condoleeza Rice and Philip Zelikow restricted his access and influence in the Bush Administration. In February, Bush changed procedures for the National Security Council, limiting the number of people with access to information and meetings, and abolishing the Inter-agency working groups. Rice was put in charge of coordinating meetings between agencies as well as setting meeting agendas. In May, Cheney was made head of the Counterterrorism Strategy Group, but took no action before 9/11. Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Aschroft and others were warned repeatedly in 2001 by Clarke, CIA Director George Tenet and others that Al Qaeda was planning major attacks in the US possibly using planes as missiles, but according to what the Bush Administration said after 9/11, the attacks were a surprise. Warnings of attacks by Bin Laden in the US, including hijacking multiple planes and using them as missiles, were received from more than ten different countries in the years before 9/11, and increased warnings were received in 2001.

Counterterrorism Politics & Policy Before 9/11 Timeline

Counterterrorism Action Before 9/11 Timeline

‘Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US’ PDB Timeline

Presidential Level Warnings Timeline

Foreign Intelligence Warnings Timeline

Inquiry into the Decision to Invade Iraq Timeline

Neoconservative Think Tank Influence on US Policies Timeline

 

Warnings, Investigations & Intelligence Before (& After) 9/11: 

The CIA, FBI, NSA and allied intelligence services had been listening to Al Qaeda and Bin Laden’s phone calls for years before 9/11; they were aware of hijackers identities and at least some key details of the 9/11 plot. FBI HQ and field offices in Minnesota, Arizona, Oklahoma and Florida were aware men with ties to Bin Laden were training at flight schools. The CIA was aware that hijackers Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar were Al Qaeda operatives at least since January of 2000, but repeatedly failed to watch list them or share their info with the FBI, in violation of standard protocol, and despite numerous additional warning signs and evidence of terror planning being received over nearly two years- and despite CIA officers being told that info had been shared with the FBI. In San Diego Alhazmi and Almihdhar lived with “tested” FBI informant Abdussattar Shaikh; after 9/11 the FBI prevented Congress from interviewing him. After the Bush Administration took office, the FBI was ordered to “back off” from investigating members of the Bin Laden family with ties to terrorist financing. FBI Agents Coleen Rowley, Robert Wright, John O’Neill and Harry Samit were convinced that an attack was imminent and actively attempted to prevent the 9/11 attacks but were obstructed by supervisors in the FBI’s Radical Fundamentalist Unit. According to Samit, David Frasca ordered him not to open a criminal investigation, and their request for a FISA warrant to search Moussaoui’s laptop had critical information removed by Michael Maltbie, making it one of the few FISA requests ever denied. FBI Translator Sibel Edmonds, hired after 9/11, soon discovered the US had been in possession of intelligence and information that could have prevented the attacks, but supervisors and policy makers had prevented it from being shared and used. Edmonds also testified that one of her co-workers, Melek Can Dickerson, was mistranslating documents, and removing others from the building, with the help of their supervisor, Mike Feghali. After 9/11, an FBI special agent requested retranslation of a document that had been translated before 9/11, thinking that important information may have been missed in the first translation. Retranslation revealed that information had been omitted that referred to building blueprints and pictures being sent overseas, as well as information regarding criminal actions in connection with obtaining VISAs through certain mideast embassies. Feghali decided not to send the new translation to the agent; instead he sent a note saying the original translation had been correct. Edmonds was fired after she faxed information to Congress and the Department of Justicie Inspector General regarding her allegations of corruption and espionage in the FBI’s Translation Unit.

Key Warnings Timeline

Key Hijacker Events Timeline

Surveillance of Bin Laden and Al Qaeda Timeline

U.S. and Allied Intelligence Services Had Penetrated The Very Highest Levels of Al Qaeda Prior to 9/11 by George Washington

Was the US government alerted to September 11 attack? by Patrick Martin

Did Bush Know? Warning Signs of 9-11 and Intelligence Failures by Nafeez Ahmed

PRIOR WARNINGS OF PLANES CRASHING INTO BUILDINGS – 911Proof.com

OBSTRUCTION OF INVESTIGATIONS PRIOR TO 9/11 And Reasons to Doubt the Official Legend of Osama Bin Ladin: The consistent high-level obstruction of U.S. counterterror field investigations prior to September 11, which might have uncovered the plot before its execution – JusticeFor911.org

Official Investigations: The Various (Non)Investigations – 911Research.WTC7.net

Warning Signs Timeline (Historical: 1983 to Present)

Al Qaeda Malaysia Summit Timeline

The Yemen Hub Timeline

Able Danger and Mohammed Atta Timeline

Alhazmi and Almihdhar: Specific Cases Timeline

[Read more…]

A dozen questions about Flight 77 and the Pentagon that might lead to justice, and one that won’t

There are many questions to be answered about the events at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.    Here are a dozen such questions that, if answered, might help to bring about justice.

  1. Exactly how was Flight 77 hijacked, considering, among other things, that the alleged hijackers were said to be identified as security risks (possibly linked to al Qaeda) when they tried to board, and were not physically imposing (all 5 and a half feet tall or less, and slender in build)?[1]
  2. How was the nation’s air defense system disabled on 9/11, and how could anything have hit the Pentagon approximately 80 minutes after the first plane was known to be hijacked?
  3. Why was Dick Cheney tracking Flight 77?[2]
  4. Why were explosive experts, who had a history of covering-up the OKC bombing and have since been accused of obstructing other investigations, hired to write the FEMA report? (Mete Sozen and Paul Mlakar).[3],[4]
  5. Why did the roof of the Pentagon collapse 30 minutes after impact, giving additional evidence for the use of explosives?   Note:  The use of explosives at the Pentagon seems to be in agreement with the use of a large plane, which would have had little penetrating power.
  6. Why was AMEC, the company that had just finished refurbishing Wedge 1 of the Pentagon, hired to lead the clean-up effort at Ground Zero?[5]
  7. Why did the NTSB not make public reports on any of the planes as is the normal procedure?[6]
  8. Why did none of the planes squawk the hijack code?
  9. Why was the official explanation for alleged phone calls made by Flight 77 passenger Barbara Olsen changed several times, and ultimately how could Ted Olsen’s story make any sense?[7]
  10. Why did high-ranking Pentagon officials cancel travel plans for the morning of September 11 “…apparently because of security concerns.”?[8]
  11. How could Hani Hanjour still have successfully piloted Flight 77 given his poor qualifications?[9]
  12. Why are those interested in The Pentagon not intently reviewing documents released by the FAA and 9/11 Commission that reveal startling questions about the aircraft and events of that day?[10]

Why are these questions NOT being pursued by independent investigators?  That’s because the attention of many potential investigators has been hijacked by the much less useful question of “What hit the Pentagon.”  This is certainly the favorite subject of intentional disruptors and official story supporters.

A great example was when 9/11 Commission staffer Miles Kara and I exchanged messages a few months ago.  He had written to my local group in an inquiry seeking support for his positions.  My response was apparently not to his liking, and he therefore sought something in my own work that could be criticized.  Despite the fact that the vast majority of my 9/11 work has centered on the World Trade Center, Army intelligence officer Kara searched through my articles and presentations over the last seven years and chose one minor statement I made about the Pentagon, in March 2006.  He then enlarged this into his own emotional statement, suggesting that those who question what hit the Pentagon do “a disservice to the men, women and children who died there that day.  Visit the Pentagon Memorial and sit on the bench of the youngest victim.“[11] Kara was most interested in discussing what hit the Pentagon only so that he could turn the issue into an emotional question about the victims.  That is usually the case with mainstream media hit pieces, and with intentional disruptors as well.

The question of what hit the Pentagon leads directly to the question of what happened to the passengers, as Miles Kara was trying to insinuate.  That fact was also emphasized by the leading promoter of the “fly-over” theory when he gave a presentation in Europe recently.  His presentation ended with the questions he really wanted us to think about.

Demand answers to the question of what happened to the people on the plane.

How did they really die?”

Where they killed them, how they killed them, I can’t know.”

I can only know what the witnesses tell me.”[12]

Is this a good way to encourage people to question 9/11, and to bring justice?  Obviously not.

Finally, note that “endorsements” are a good way to pit people against each other, and that’s exactly what has been done.  There has never been another issue in the truth movement that has required the pursuit of endorsements but, for some reason, this least important question about the Pentagon is promoted as an important issue requiring us to divide into camps.  Divide and conquer is the strategy of the intentional disruptor.

In other words, what hit the Pentagon does not bring us closer to justice but actually brings us farther from that goal because it exacerbates the divisions within the truth movement while we waste time.  That’s probably why the intentional disruptors and government supporters always drive the conversations to that one question.

People who are serious about 9/11 truth and justice focus on the facts that help us come not only to truth, but to a useful truth.  We should make only minimal reference to any facts that do not help us achieve truth and justice.  Instead, we should make note that what hit the Pentagon, for example, is a minor and nearly useless issue that is used by intentional disruptors and official story promoters as they work to keep the truth from being exposed.


[1] Complete 911 Timeline, American Airlines Flight 77, http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&day_of_9/11=aa77

[2] Norman Mineta’s testimony to the 9/11 Commission makes clear that Dick Cheney was tracking Flight 77 while it was more than 50 miles away from Washington DC.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y

[3] Mete Sozen has since become a leading spokesman for the official story about the WTC as well.  For more about him, see my articles “Looking for Truth in Credentials: The Peculiar WTC ‘Experts’”, http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=RYA20070313&articleId=5071 and “Finally, an apology from the National Geographic Channel”, http://911blogger.com/news/2009-08-22/finally-apology-national-geographic-channel

[4] Some very seriouis accusations have been made against Paul Mlakar by Prof. Raymond B. Seed of the University of California, Berkeley, Letter entitled Re: New Orleans, Hurricane Katrina, And the Soul of the Profession, October 30, 2007, http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-15/pentagon-investigation-leader-paul-mlakar-obstructed-investigation-new-orleans-according-uc-berkeley-professor

[5] Kevin R. Ryan, Demolition Access to the WTC Towers: Part Four – Cleanup, 911Review.com, February 11, 2010,  http://911review.com/articles/ryan/demolition_access_p4.html

[6] 911Research.com, NTSB Reports: Long-Hidden NTSB Reports Contain Flight Data, http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/ntsb.html

[7] David Ray Griffin, Ted Olson’s Report of Phone Calls from Barbara Olson on 9/11: Three Official Denials, GlobalResearch.ca, April 1, 2008, http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8514

[8] The Family Steering Committee for an Independent 9/11 Commission, http://www.911independentcommission.org/

[9] Complete 911 Timeline, Hani Hanjour, http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&the_alleged_9/11_hijackers=haniHanjour

[10] See the FOIA responses obtained by the 9/11 Working Group of Bloomington,

http://www.911workinggroup.org/

Also see the documents released by the 911 Commission here.

Here’s an example:

UAL and AAL employees:  Contradictions about transponders.  ACARS data missing.  UAL had radar continuity.

http://media.nara.gov/9-11/MFR/t-0148-911MFR-01098.pdf

Many of the documents are just cover pages saying the information is still “Restricted”. These include interviews of the CIA agents, Prince Bandar, and the first responders.

[11] Miles Kara, Archive for the ‘Bloomington Group’ Category, 9/11 Revisited website, http://www.oredigger61.org/?cat=25

[12] Parody video of CIT tour and presentation in which, at 02:18, the speaker tells his French audience the reasons why CIT is working so hard.  Click here to watch the CIT parpdy.

Tell Me What Treason Looks Like; This is What Treason Looks Like

S.1867

Latest Title: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012
Sponsor: Sen Levin, Carl [MI] (introduced 11/15/2011) Cosponsors (None)
Related Bills: H.R.1540
Latest Major Action: 12/1/2011 Passed/agreed to in Senate. Status: Passed Senate with amendments by Yea-Nay. 93 – 7. Record Vote Number: 218.
Latest Action: 12/1/2011 See also H.R. 1540.

FOLLOW THIS BILL > http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:s.1867:

Fact Sheet: New Law Allowing for Indefinite Military Detention for Americans Without Charge or Trial

  • S. 1867, the National Defense Authorization Act passed by a 93 -7 vote in the U.S. Senate on November 30 and now headed
    toward becoming law unless vetoed by the president, allows for American citizens to be taken into military custody without
    charge or trial, for life, for the first time in American history. The new law is intended to designate the entire world, including
    the U.S., as the “battlefield” in the war on terror. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said in a speech on the Senate floor: “1031, the
    statement of authority to detain, does apply to American citizens and it designates the world as the battlefield, including the
    homeland.”
  • The Christian Science Monitor reports: “”Legislation passed by the Senate this week and headed for the House – and a
    possible presidential veto – could allow the US military to detain American citizens indefinitely.” (“Guantánamo for US
    citizens? Senate bill raises questions,” Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 3, 2011)
  • The law would permanently and unconstitutionally deprive Americans of their Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial,
    guaranteed in the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution.
  • Once in military detention there is no recourse for proving innocence. None of the protections, due process, or 230 years of
    criminal law and legal processes apply. The military operates under a chain of command answerable only to the Secretary of
    Defense and the president. After Obama, all presidents will inherit these powers.
  • The Washington Post has confirmed a secret list of Americans to be assassinated, reporting on Jan. 26, 2010: “The military’s
    Joint Special Operations Command maintains a target list that includes several Americans…U.S. officials have said that the
    government is prepared to kill U.S. citizens who are believed to be involved in terrorist activities that threaten Americans.”
    There is no way to determine who is on the list, as it is “classified.” (“U.S. military teams, intelligence deeply involved in aiding
    Yemen on strikes,” Washington Post, by Dana Priest, Jan. 27, 2010)
  • The law’s primary sponsors are Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) and Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI). (Chris Anders, Senior Legislative
    Counsel for ACLU, Washington office, “Senators Demand the Military Lock Up of American Citizens in a “Battlefield” They
    Define as Being Right Outside Your Window,” Nov. 23, 2011, http://tinyurl.com/85xfjyg )
  • The only U.S. senators who voted against the law, “7 Patriots” are: Jeff Merkley [D], Tom Harkin [D], Ron Wyden [D],
    Thomas Coburn, [R], Mike Lee [R], Rand Paul [R], and Bernie Sanders [I].
  • The Oath of Office of the U.S. senator, required by the Constitution before assuming duties, as well as any American military
    officer, is: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all
    enemies, foreign and domestic…” The Oath makes no mention of defending territory, the president, or anything other than the
    Constitution. The Founders intended that defense of the Constitution come before all else. Thomas Jefferson said: “I consider
    trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its
    constitution.” By violating their Oath to protect and defend the United States Constitution, these senators have made
    themselves “domestic enemies” of the Constitution.
  • Case law has until now been ambiguous on the government’s ability to designate American citizens as “enemy combatants”
    for life. The authority of the executive branch to invoke wartime powers in order to hold American citizen Jose Padilla as an
    enemy combatant in 2001 was upheld by Judge J. Michael Luttig in the Fourth Circuit, but Padilla was released to a civilian
    trial before the decision could be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court. The McCain-Levin law for the first time clearly
    attempts to permanently override every citizen’s right to a jury trial; under the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
    (Wikipedia, “Jose Padilla”)
  • 18 states have public official recall laws. A few, like Rhode Island, specifically exclude federal officials, although this can be
    changed by the state legislature, and recall laws can be passed by any state. Although not written into the Constitution, the
    power to recall federal officials is grounded in the Tenth Amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the
    Constitution nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
  • Opposition to what amounts to a blatant betrayal of the Oath of Office has united Americans from different parts of the
    political spectrum as never before.

For more information see: “We Are All Really Bradley Manning Now: Senate Passes Military Detention for American
Citizens,” WarIsACrime.org, http://tinyurl.com/85bwqq4

[Read more…]

Post-September 11, NSA "Enemies" Include Us

source: Politico

by James Bamford

Illustration by Matt Mahurin.

Illustration by Matt Mahurin.

Somewhere between Sept. 11 and today, the enemy morphed from a handful of terrorists to the American population at large, leaving us nowhere to run and no place to hide.

Within weeks of the attacks, the giant ears of the National Security Agency, always pointed outward toward potential enemies, turned inward on the American public itself. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, established 23 years before to ensure that only suspected foreign agents and terrorists were targeted by the NSA, would be bypassed. Telecom companies, required by law to keep the computerized phone records of their customers confidential unless presented with a warrant, would secretly turn them over in bulk to the NSA without ever asking for a warrant.

Around the country, in tall, windowless telecom company buildings known as switches, NSA technicians quietly began installing beam-splitters to redirect duplicate copies of all phone calls and email messages to secret rooms behind electronic cipher locks.

There, NSA software and hardware designed for “deep packet inspection” filtered through the billions of email messages looking for key names, words, phrases and addresses. The equipment also monitored phone conversations and even what pages people view on the Web — the porn sites they visit, the books they buy on Amazon, the social networks they interact with and the text messages they send and receive.

Because the information is collected in real time, attempting to delete history caches from a computer is useless.

At the NSA, thousands of analysts who once eavesdropped on troop movements of enemy soldiers in distant countries were now listening in on the bedroom conversations of innocent Americans in nearby states.

“We were told that we were to listen to all conversations that were intercepted, to include those of Americans,” Adrienne Kinne, a former NSA “voice interceptor,” told me. She was recalled to active duty after Sept. 11.

“Some of those conversations are personal,” she said. “Some even intimate. … I had a real problem with the fact that people were listening to it and that I was listening to it. … When I was on active duty in ’94 to ’98, we would never collect on an American.”

[Read more…]

Ten Years On, Sick Ground Zero Workers Still Without Proper Care

source: In These Times
via 911truth.org

by Michelle Chen

This weekend, the public will mourn a site of loss, recasting the painful memories and haunting fears that still hover over the aftermath at Ground Zero. But the people who worked and breathed that tragedy in the days and months following September 11 won’t be at the primary commemoration ceremony for the families of victims. The Mayor’s decision to limit the attendees by excluding the 9/11 first responders is an unnerving metaphor for an unhealed scar of 9/11. Many of the rescue and recovery workers who labored at Ground Zero have been plagued by a metastasizing medical crisis, aggravated by chronic political failure.

This week, 9/11 firefighters and police chiefs rallied to demand changes to the rules governing compensation for health problems tied to poisonous air and debris at Ground Zero. They want federal funds to support treatment for cancer, which is currently omitted from the primary legislation covering Ground Zero-related medical needs. For years, researchers have been uncovering fresh evidence of widespread and devastating illnesses afflicting a large portion of people exposed to the aftermath; ongoing health issues range from crippling lung and breathing problems to post-traumatic stress disorder. But adequate funding for 9/11 workers has often been ensnared in political gridlock, not to mention the general incompetence of the healthcare system.

The UK Guardian reports that new research could trump politicians’ concerns over potential cancer liabilities:

Cancer treatment has been specifically excluded from federal health funding, with officials arguing there has been insufficient evidence to prove any direct link between the toxins present at the site and the disease.

But last week the results of the first large-scale study, published in the Lancet, found that firefighters who were involved on the day of the attacks and in the weeks that followed had a 19 percent higher risk of contracting cancer.

The study looked at 9,800 male firefighters, comparing those present during and after the attacks with those who were not involved.

[Read more…]

Colorado Public Television to Commemorate the 10th Anniversary of 9/11 with the Broadcast of the Acclaimed Documentary “9/11 Press For Truth” with Special Guests

??????????????????FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

August 8, 2011
Denver, Colorado

Colorado 9/11 Visibility Announces: Colorado Public Television to Commemorate the 10th Anniversary of 9/11 with the Broadcast of the Acclaimed Documentary “9/11 Press For Truth” with Special Guests

When: Thursday, August 11, 2011, 7:00 – 9:30 PM (MDT), with an encore airing immediately following at 9:30 PM – 12:00 AM (MDT).

Live Streaming: Of special interest, Colorado Public Television (CPT12) will be streaming this live event at: http://www.cpt12.org/911pressfortruth . At this link, viewers can also view program details, join the discussion, and pledge support.

9/11 Press For Truth: Based in part on Paul Thompson’s exhaustively researched book “The Terror Timeline,” published in 2004 by HarperCollins, the documentary follows three mothers from New Jersey who lost their husbands on September 11th, then led a group of victims’ relatives calling themselves the 9/11 Families Steering Committee in a heart-rending battle with the White House for answers and accountability. For more on the film, see www.911pressfortruth.com.

Appearing live in the CPT12 studios: Shari Bernson of CPT12 and Leland Rucker of Free Speech TV will interview Director Ray Nowosielski, Co-Creator John Duffy, and author Paul Thompson. The presentation will also include the premiere of some brand new video clips from the filmmakers’ latest project and a discussion by them of the newsworthy revelations therein.

CPT12 is the first PBS station to air content addressing issues of government transparency and accountability with regard to the events of 9/11. Their PBS premiere broadcast of “9/11 Press For Truth” in June 2009, with special in-studio guests Director Ray Nowosielski, Producer Kyle Hence, and victim’s family member Bob McIlvaine was a successful fundraiser not without controversy. The station received many viewer responses, pro and con, nationally and internationally.

Over the succeeding months, CPT12 continued down the path of airing controversial documentaries that push the envelope of political and cultural commentary which have been similarly successful in generating pledges and public commentary. Colorado Public Television is committed to presenting alternative perspectives and to examining information and issues not addressed elsewhere in the mainstream media: http://www.cpt12.org/about/about_us.cfm

Colorado 9-11 Visibility is a multi-partisan group of Colorado citizens dedicated to achieving a new and truly independent investigation into the events of September 11th, 2001. For more information, please visit www.colorado911visibility.org.

Contact information:

Shari Bernson: sbernson@cpt12.org 303.296.1212
Tim Boyle: tim@colorado911visibility.org 720.530.9854?????????????ikoni????? ??????ikoni

9/11 First Responders Will Be Screened For Terrorism

source: Huffington Post

by Michael McAlilff

WASHINGTON — A provision in the new 9/11 health bill may be adding insult to injury for people who fell sick after their service in the aftermath of the 2001 Al Qaeda attacks, The Huffington Post has learned.

The tens of thousands of cops, firefighters, construction workers and others who survived the worst terrorist assault in U.S. history and risked their lives in its wake will soon be informed that their names must be run through the FBI’s terrorism watch list, according to a letter obtained by HuffPost.

Any of the responders who are not compared to the database of suspected terrorists would be barred from getting treatment for the numerous, worsening ailments that the James Zadroga 9/11 Health And Compensation Law was passed to address.

It’s a requirement that was tacked onto the law during the bitter debates over it last year.

The letter from Dr. John Howard, director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, informs medical providers and administrators that they should begin letting patients know before the new program kicks in this July.

“This is absurd,” said Glen Kline, a former NYPD emergency services officer. “It’s silly. It’s stupid. It’s asinine.”

“It’s comical at best, and I think it’s an insult to everyone who worked on The Pile and is sick and suffering from 9/11,” said John Feal, a former construction worker who lost half a foot at Ground Zero and runs the advocacy group Fealgood Foundation.

The provision was added in an amendment by Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.) during the heated debate over the bill in the House Energy and Commerce Committee last May.

Sept. 11 responders in the committee room at the time mostly shook their heads at the move, which Democrats accepted on a voice vote after battling to bar other amendments on abortion and immigration that might have killed the bill.

But suddenly the point is no longer just a strategic concession to get a law passed.

As doctors and administrators begin acting on the federal instructions, participants in the 9/11 treatment and monitoring programs will soon be told that their names, places of birth, addresses, government ID numbers and other personal data will be provided to the FBI to ensure they are not terrorists.

[Read more…]

Rights Are Curtailed for Terror Suspects

source: Wall Street Journal

by Evan Perez

Courtroom sketch of bombing suspect Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. European Pressphoto Agency

New rules allow investigators to hold domestic-terror suspects longer than others without giving them a Miranda warning, significantly expanding exceptions to the instructions that have governed the handling of criminal suspects for more than four decades.

The move is one of the Obama administration’s most significant revisions to rules governing the investigation of terror suspects in the U.S. And it potentially opens a new political tussle over national security policy, as the administration marks another step back from pre-election criticism of unorthodox counterterror methods.

The Supreme Court’s 1966 Miranda ruling obligates law-enforcement officials to advise suspects of their rights to remain silent and to have an attorney present for questioning. A 1984 decision amended that by allowing the questioning of suspects for a limited time before issuing the warning in cases where public safety was at issue.

That exception was seen as a limited device to be used only in cases of an imminent safety threat, but the new rules give interrogators more latitude and flexibility to define what counts as an appropriate circumstance to waive Miranda rights.

A Federal Bureau of Investigation memorandum reviewed by The Wall Street Journal says the policy applies to “exceptional cases” where investigators “conclude that continued unwarned interrogation is necessary to collect valuable and timely intelligence not related to any immediate threat.” Such action would need prior approval from FBI supervisors and Justice Department lawyers, according to the memo, which was issued in December but not made public.

[Read more…]