We have journeyed now through a long process, starting with the stunning, delayed response-time of civilian air-defense on Sept 11th, which we covered in Part 1A and 1B.
We saw how this grossly contradicted routine procedure.
Begining with Flight 77, we chronicled a thirty-five minute delay: between the time that the plane was "probably hijacked" and when the FAA supposedly notified NORAD.
With Flight 11, we found a twenty-four minute delay, between the time when radio/transponder contact was lost, (plane off-course) and when the order for jets to scramble went through.
In the case of Flights 175, 11, and 77, NORAD refused to use the many bases with "battle-ready" fighter squadrons which were close to the planes, (including Andrews AFB); and instead, chose bases which were 130 and almost 200 miles away.
Flight 93 was in the air for fifty minutes after the FAA declared it hijacked, and not a single fighter-intercept was in the vicinity when it crashed.
The collapse and negligence of civilian air defense was clearly system-wide.
We also found that this included the President, who refused to remove himself from a children's classroom for thirty minutes during a national emergency -then was kept from returning to Washington for over nine hours, (due to some "credible threat" that later vanished into "no comment").
Then we discovered that top officials in a Command Center in the Pentagon were tapped into all civilian and military radar systems -and were, by law, to be informed by the FAA of any hijackings, at the earliest opportunity.
Of necessity, all this expanded the scope of our inquiry to include the FBI investigation, which turned out to be an almost comic festival of fabrication which only a nation with no more stomach for bad news could have endured: disappearing black-boxes and indestructible passports, devout Moslem suicide bombers with a taste for strip joints and christian confessionals, who can't fly bi-planes, and can't remember whether they've been dead for two years or are still living in the Middle East; ad lib infintum.
This compelled us to continue looking up, towards a higher level of authority for the source of the breakdown; and found, within the highest ranks of the Pentagon, the claim that they were "uninformed" -as to the emergencies taking place.
This stunning position was easliy proven to be both, groundless and illuminating; from there, the whole labyrinth of explanations for the air-defense collapse comes into a sudden clarity -casting the entire "official" timeline, (of when the FAA supposedly informed NORAD of the hijackings) into doubt.
Each one of these explanations, (or spins) we have examined in some detail: "few planes available," "to shoot or not to shoot down," "we really tried," "communication problems," and found them flimsy at best, ludicrous or fraudulent in the main.... all designed to divert attention from the command center which claimed it was "not informed."
We examined the behaviour of the mainstream media at some length, (dedicated damage-control) then the appearance of General Richard Myers before the Senate Confirmation Hearing, fully confirming the evidence of criminal negligence at the highest level in the Pentagon.
The Senate too, seemed to be in on the deal.
The wisespread nature of this collusion eventually led us to consider the possibility that the high-level negligence may have been intentional, (i.e. treasonous) and so we asked the question: who benefits from the Sept 11th attacks.
and a more-powerful Bush Administration benefited;
though we found
no clear evidence, by which we could discern whether such elements intentionally abetted the "terrorists," or whether they merely took advantage of the attacks to achieve long-standing policy gains and cover up their own negligence.
We further discovered that Osama Bin Laden, Al Queda, and the Taliban were paid clients/servants of the CIA, (through Pakistan) -doing NATO's bidding in the former Soviet Republics of Bosnia, Kosovo, Turkmenistan, and the like.
Like many of the U.S.-supported extremists and dictators around the world, this group appears to have served a dual role: as fomenters of destabilization in countries ripe for capital "investment", (plunder) and as the target for America's rather routine wrath against the "enemies of civilization."
Whatever Bin Laden's relationship to the attacks of Sept. 11th, it's clear that the Bush Administration has been summarily dishonest in its characterization of Bin Laden and co. as a "distant" enemy.
We then clarified the role of the "spin":
give the public enough plausible-sounding information to keep our limited attention span moving past the point of contention until we no longer care.
You who are now reading this have persevered, and stand in posession of clear faculties to consider the following
We have not been told the truth about Sept 11, 2001 -not by the government, the military, media.
A criminal negligence occurred within the highest ranks of the Pentagon and Executive on Sept. 11th -without which, the terrorist attacks would not have been successful; and no one in positions of authority is willing to talk about it.
The case against Osama Bin Laden and co. has never been in doubt; for there never has been a case, to speak of. In the name of "national security," the Bush Administration has made no attempt to make a case before the public; rather, circumstantial evidence and hearsay has served to achieve long-standing economic and military aims in Afghanistan, and to distract from the culpability of top American officials, in the criminal negligence of Sept 11.
The possibility that some top officials intentionally abetted the terrorist attacks, (and that others have covered up for them) has not been ruled out; though this has yet to be adequately examined.
With more civilians killed from the U.S. bombing of Afghanistan than the attacks on the World Trade Center, (webactive.com democracy now archive, Dec. 10th) the above actions by the Bush Administration are simply criminal in nature:unless, and to the
degree that, the Administration can demonstrate to U.S. citizens a willingness to
first take responsibility for their own possible
failures during the events of Sept 11, by submitting to an open, public review.
Such an inquiry must start with the president being called to explain,
as commander-in-chief, why did he initially do nothing for thirty minutes, (in the midst of a national emergency) when thousands of lives were at stake?
-where his own decision-making authority is officially claimed to have been essential, if an airliner needed to be shot down.
Why, during this national emergency, was he flown halfway across the country, and prevented from reaching Washington for 91/2 hours, because it was believed there was "credible evidence" that Air Force One was in danger, from terrorists who had secret access codes?
Who made that warning? Why was it heeded? Why was it later dismissed as irrelevant?
Why was Flight 77, (hijack-suspected) allowed to stay in the air for thirty-five minutes after the first attack on the World Trade Center had been confirmed -without a single plane able to intercept it?
Why was Flight 11 in the air for twenty-four minutes, off-course, without transponder or
radio contact, before fighters were ordered to intercept it?
Why did the Pentagon and NORAD not use planes at Andrew’s AFB to defend Washington?
before Flight 77 struck its target, rather than after? then deny that those planes were used at all?
Why was Flight 93 in the air for fifty minutes after the military knew it was hijacked, with no fighters near to intercepting it.
By it's refusal to openly discuss the affair, the Bush Administration has profoundly abused the trust of the American people.
The voices in the immediate aftermath -speaking the obvious, seeking answers- have
been swept away on a tide of vengeance, rising off the promise of
"evidence" undisclosed, insufficient, often ludicrous.
The most powerful nation on earth -one of the most tightly controlled air
spaces in the world- has just been struck in the heart of its jurisdiction,
and the security establishment wants us to let them do an internal
One may reasonably ask: How badly do they have to screw up before we, the public, are allowed to
Under the rubric of "security," any "official" investigation into the Sept
11th security breakdown will be little more than an internal condolence,
by which the "poor CIA" and its "dedicated" assortment of "assets" will be allowed to lick their
The Bush Administration has a moral obligation to immediately call for the fullest of national, public inquiries -the prime directive of which must be:
to involve as many local citizens as possible in the collection, discussion, and presentation of research, through the creation of a national web-site, with full interactive, and organizational support to ensure local, de-centralized access and participation.
Make no mistake: these charges are in no way meant to imply a dis-loyalty to America and its people.
Our capacity to criticize a government does not mean we are for the other side; on the contrary, only by fulfilling our role as conscious citizens, (the watchdogs of government) do we truly earn the right to live in a free society.
The behavior of the mainstream media, in passively representing the government position, (and in the most graphically entertaining way) suggests that they cannot be relied on to pursue a rigorous critique of official doctrine.
Witness such bits of wisdom in the volatile days following the tragedy:
- "World War III" ('New York Times,' 9/13)
- "Give War A Chance" ('Philadelphia Inquirer,' 9/13)
- "Time To Use The Nuclear Option" ('Washington Times,' 9/14).
It must be up to those of us in the various grass-roots communities to carry on the research, share information -and articulate a review of the available evidence, sufficient to put a demand for a full, public inquiry into the events of Sept 11th at the forefront of our activity.
We cannot cease questioning the attacks on Afghanistan, (and other countries) denouncing racist reaction, and the curtailment of civil rights, etc; yet neither can we be satisfied with this purely defensive response.
Rather, we should seize upon the demand for an inquiry -as the pivot upon which to expose the government’s duplicity in going to war; for, in its’ arrogance, it has vastly over-reached itself.
Yet until we focus on this investigation, the opportunity will not be realized;
and the larger, deeper criticisms will not stand -amidst the fear that the campaign
of terror enshrines.
A word here should be said about the position taken by respected critics such as Noam Chomsky, Micheal Albert, and others: while technically correct in their characterization of the United States government as the world's leading supporter of global terror, (with Europe a close second) this position is hopelessly flawed in terms of the present mindset of the American people -due to the attacks of Sept 11.
We have to understand that while the attacks appear to have been a great strengthener of the Administration, and American beligerance abroad, they actually represent their deepest achilles heal -once the true nature of the behavior becomes revealed.
Once the general public begins to hear a consistent, solid, and well-documented voice -calling into question the government’s immunity from investigation- then the whole justification for blindly accepting the government’s rationale for bombing Afghanistan, (and blaming Bin Laden) will also come into question.
From there, public opinion will create a slow-closing vice upon the governmental veil
-from which it will only be able to redeem itself, by allowing an open and honest truth to sail
through the bankrupt blanket of silence which now suffocates our real, human hope:
that it may emerge, at long last, into the light of day.
If the evidence available so far, proves to be just the tip of the ice-burg, then over time, the U.S. administration will prove itself far to be far more vulnerable around the issue of incompetence, criminal negligence, or worse... than from any foreign policy or civil libertarian standpoint.
It’s time for us to take the offensive, by building a case before the American people.
As Stan Goff, re-humanized former member of U.S. special forces says, "the left
[anti-globalization movement] has missed the boat on this one; by allowing them to get
away with rushing past the question of who did what on September 11th.... accepting
[the govt's] framework... [we’re missing] the more crucial point that [the official]
story about Sept. 11 is full of holes." (narconews.com)
So full of holes you could fly a plane through it.
Return to the top of This Page.