9-11 Mysteries Remain

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
9-11 Mysteries Remain

Three Years After Terror Attacks, Public Still Doubts ‘Official’ Story


By Christopher Bollyn

SOMERSET COUNTY, Pennsylvania—Three years after the events of 9-11, half of the residents of New York City believe U.S. leaders had foreknowledge and “consciously failed” to act to prevent the disasters, while two in three want a new investigation of the “still-unanswered questions.”

In the first survey of public opinion about allegations of U.S. government complicity and whitewashing of the events of 9-11, a Zogby International poll found that fewer than two in five New Yorkers believe the official 9-11 commission “answered all of the important questions about what actually happened on Sept. 11.”

One in two New York City residents say that senior government officials “knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around Sept. 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act,” according to the poll of Aug. 24-26, 2004.

Sixty-six percent called for another full investigation, by Congress or Elliot Spitzer (left), New York’s attorney general, to resolve the “unanswered questions.”

“I think these numbers show that most New Yorkers are now fed up with the silence, and that politicians trying to exploit 9-11 do so at their peril,” said W. David Kubiak, executive director of 911truth.org, one of the groups that commissioned the poll. “The 9-11 case is not closed, and New York’s questions are not going away.”

The New York Times, on the other hand, told puzzled readers on Sept. 11, 2004, that it’s possible to know what happened on 9-11 “without knowing what happened.”

“In the three years since 9-11, we’ve begun to understand that it’s possible to know what happened without knowing what happened,” the editorial began. “Some of what we need to know publicly has been provided by the report of the 9-11 commission. Other answers are lacking.”

Sept. 11 is “a central event in this nation’s history,” the Times editorial concluded. “It’s important that we who live most immediately in its shadow press hard to learn everything that can be learned about that day and to make sure that nothing is allowed to fade into the world of the publicly unknowable.”

The New York Times efforts, however, did not include sending a reporter to either of the two recent 9-11 conferences held on Broadway in downtown Manhattan that addressed the unanswered questions.

The first event, “The 9-11 Citizens Commission: The Omissions Hearings,” was held Sept. 9 at Symphony Space on Broadway. This six-hour conference was chaired by former Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.) and brought together panels of experts who presented new evidence and raised questions about the official version of what happened.

The second event, “Confronting the Evidence: 9-11 and the Search for Truth,” was held at the Manhattan Center Ballroom during the evening of Sept. 11.

While American Free Press participated in both conferences, The New York Times, which says it should “press hard to learn everything that can be learned about that day,” confirmed it had not covered either event.

While the Times carried a 9-11 story daily during the days leading up to the third anniversary, its reporting failed to ask critical questions. For example, in a Sept. 10 article entitled “Falling Bodies,” the fate of more than 1,000 people trapped in the twin towers above the levels impacted by the planes is discussed without mentioning the possibility of rescue by helicopter—or the fact that the doors to the roof had been locked.

A CITIZEN’S EFFORTS

Both Manhattan events were sponsored by a remarkable and well-heeled citizen named Jimmy Walter, who has dedicated one-tenth of his net worth to bring attention to the yet-unanswered questions of 9-11.

To bring these issues to a wider audience, Walter is purchasing full-page ads in mainstream magazines and newspapers raising key points and promoting books such as Painful Questions by Eric Hufschmid.

Walter told AFP he is spending $250,000 to bring public attention to the official cover-up of 9-11. Walter said he had only realized that something was seriously wrong with the government’s version of events after having seen Hufschmid’s book and videos, which was like “an epiphany.”

Before that “epiphany,” Walter said he had believed that 9-11 had been “a sin of omission, not commission.”

“I believe explosives [were] used,” Walter said about the destruction of the twin towers. Told that the Anti-Defamation League attacked this writer for an article about eyewitness evidence of explosions in the towers immediately after 9-11, Walter said: “The Mossad is in it up to their necks.”

Walter, 57, described himself as a “Bush clone.” The son of a millionaire, Walter graduated cum laude from a prestigious prep school and then obtained an undergraduate degree from the University of North Carolina.

Like Bush, Walter said he served in the Air National Guard in Florida and found the regulation that allowed him to skip out the last two years. After bouts of drug use and alcohol abuse, Walter said he “found the truth.”

“I want to do something significant,” Walter said. And bringing public attention to the unanswered questions about 9-11 is the best way to do that, he said. Walter recently purchased full-page ads in Reader’s Digest, Business Week, New Yorker and Inc.

When 9-11 “activist” and conference “advisor” Nicolas Levis hysterically tried to steer the second conference away from discussion of the evidence, security guards removed him from the theater.

This writer was then asked to join the second panel, which discussed the physical evidence, with author Webster G. Tarpley and engineer Jeff King.

Both Tarpley and King agree that the towers were demolished in a crime that employed both conventional and exotic technologies.

FLIGHT 93

American Free Press visited Somerset County to look into some of the questions surrounding United Airlines Flight 93, which allegedly turned over and crashed in a refilled strip mine between Lambertsville and Shanksville, Pa., taking 44 lives with it.

Many local residents believe the plane was shot down, which they say would explain why parts of the plane and its contents were found strewn over a large area.

One question, “is what happened to the physical wreckage of the plane?”

“There was no plane,” Ernie Stull, mayor of Shanksville, told German television in March 2003:

“My sister and a good friend of mine were the first ones there,” Stull said. “They were standing on a street corner in Shanksville talking. Their car was nearby, so they were the first here—and the fire department came. Everyone was puzzled, because the call had been that a plane had crashed. But there was no plane.”

“They had been sent here because of a crash, but there was no plane?” the reporter asked.

“No. Nothing. Only this hole.”

When AFP asked Stull about his comments, he disagreed about when he had gone to the crash site. “A day or two later,” Stull said, was about when he went to the site. But he reiterated the fact that they saw little evidence of a plane crash.

Nena Lensbouer, who had prepared lunch for the workers at the scrap yard overlooking the crash site, was the first person to go up to the smoking crater.

Lensbouer told AFP that the hole was five to six feet deep and smaller than the 24-foot trailer in her front yard. She described hearing “an explosion, like an atomic bomb”—not a crash.

Lensbouer called 911 and stayed on the line as she ran across the reclaimed land of the former strip mine to within 15 feet of the smoking crater.

Lensbouer told AFP that she did not see any evidence of a plane then or at any time during the excavation at the site, an effort that reportedly recovered 95 percent of the plane and 10 percent of the human remains.

While specific details vary, the explanation for the disappearance of the plane is that the reclaimed land acted like liquid and absorbed the aircraft, which is said to have impacted at between 450 and 600 miles per hour.

This explanation is also used to explain why there was only a brief explosion with one short-lived smoke cloud, not unlike a bomb blast.

“I never saw that smoke,” Paula Long, an eyewitness, told AFP. Long ran “immediately” after hearing the crash but did not see the cloud of smoke caught in the now-famous photograph by Valencia McClatchey, she said.

“It [the ground] liquefied,” Bob Leverknight, an active member of the Air National Guard and correspondent with Somerset’s Daily American, told AFP regarding how the wreck and much of the fuel disappeared. One of the massive engines, Leverknight said, however, bounced off the ground and was found in the woods.

Jim Svonavec, whose company worked at the site and provided excavation equipment, told AFP that the recovery of the engine “at least 1,800 feet into the woods,” was done solely by FBI agents using his equipment.



See page 24 for an ad for AFP’s unrefuted, 20-page 9-11 report.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/9-11_mysteries.html
 

Darkgrammer

Nominee Member
Well the whole 9/11 thing theory is that it is a conspiracy by the White House Puppets.

Here Let me Explain: Remember Pearl Harbor when they attacked and the manhattan project soon started. Well they knew the pontential of an Atom Bomb, that it would not be approved unless something major was to call its mighty force.. oh say a direct attack on the United States. My theory (Remember Gullible People, this is just a theory, so put your flaming sword away) is that they let the attack happen on purpose, they had intercepted a radio transmission saying that they will attack on that day, but they claimed that the dates got confusing because Japan has a diffrent Time Zone. I say Bulls**t they knew, CIA and the Army was smart as to know, but they cleverly disguise the excuse as.. how should I put it... Military Error.

Thus bringing us to 9/11 the heads of the white house decided that the money they had was not enough so they decided what better way of population control then to destroy a NYC tower and claim it was someone with money oh say Osama, whos Family is heavily in touch with the Bush Family. So they decide Blame it on the rich son and lets juice them out. And the victims will be consider Martyrs not pawns. So thus allowin them to attack and such. They knew that the plane was going to the White House, so they shot it down. And what was the excuse of Bush? That it was clintons fault cause he knew that they were planning but it backfired on him cause evidence points to him. And now people are still bliss as to vote for him.

So all the things that happen in my opinion are by the White House Error, from Pearl Harbor to 9/11, but people always face the obvious and not the truth.
 

moghrabi

House Member
May 25, 2004
4,508
4
38
Canada
Very good analysis. There is a lot of truth to it and I personally never thought about the Pearl Harbor incident. It makes total sense.
 

Rick van Opbergen

House Member
Sep 16, 2004
4,080
0
36
The Netherlands
www.google.com
And I guess the Netherlands provoked the invasion of Nazi-Germany to ensure they would get Marshall aid afterwards? (...) Point is: as logical as it may seem (that the Bush government gained positive things from 9/11, and thus they have to be involved in the attacks on 9/11), it does not necessarily have to mean that it's true. Unanswered questions: yes they exist. Vagueness from the side of Washington: yes it exist. Making the conclusion that Washington was involved: premature.
 

bogie

Electoral Member
Jun 21, 2002
681
0
16
75
Barrie, ON Canada
maltesefalcon.bogart.com
The Americans being "reactive" instead of "proactive" is well documented in the history books. Stupid, and arrogant, lack of action, by military leaders is also well known. But "conspiracy theory" is bunk!

This is simply fueled by the rapid communication available on the Internet - true terrorism at work. Start a rumour, back it up with half-truths, inuendos, and "what ifs", and you have started a cancer that could help to destroy from within.

The best weapon that terrorists have is the "enemy within" - US citizens who are unknowing, unsuspecting, weak minded, always wanting to blame higher authority, easily swayed, and, most importantly, recruited to "help the cause" without even knowing it. Add to that the typical political corruption and greed, and the mistrust of such people, and you have the almost perfect weapon. And at little or no cost.

Do you honestly believe that Pearl Harbor and 9-11 were knowingly allowed to happen? C'mon, get real!

Being unprepared, yes.

Being overly arrogant to think that the "not on our turf" concept would be good enough, yes.

Being too complacent in our affluent society to see what is going on elsewhere in the world, and ignore it for our own good, yes.

Only helping those when it would financially benefit ourselves, yes.

Our (mostly US) political leaders, and peoples (in an indirect way) are guilty as ever.

But to kill your own people to attain these financial goals, as purported, wake up! The more this type of talk continues, the more infiltrated the terrorism becomes, propagating like a cancer.

"United we stand, divided we fall" is ever so true.
 

vista

Electoral Member
Mar 28, 2004
314
0
16
www.newsgateway.ca
I don't deal with conspiracy theory, I deal with conspiracy fact.

Pearl Harbour was exposed long ago in 'Infamy: Pearl Harbor and Its Aftermath', by Pulitzer-prize winner John Toland and 'Day of Deceit', by Robert Stinnet. " ...I think you could probably trace [this type of public deception for military purposes] back to Caesar's time. ""

Gore Vidal, excerpt from essays in The Time Literary Supplement, December 2000"

"Franklin Delano Roosevelt deliberately provoked the Japanese into attacking us at Pearl Harbour. Why? As of 1940, he wanted us in the war against Hitler, but 80 percent of the American people wanted no European war of any kind after the disappointments of 1917. He could do nothing to budge an isolationist electorate.

Secretly, FDR began a series of provocations to goad the Japanese into what turned out to be an attack on our fleet at Pearl Harbour, thus making inevitable our prompt, wholehearted entry into the Second World War.

We had broken Japan’s diplomatic code, Purple, but by early October 1940, we had also broken many of the Japanese Military codes, specifically: the twenty-nine separate naval codes.

On Saturday, November 15,1941 General Marshall, the U.S. Army Chief of Staff, told Washington newspaper bureau chiefs (swearing them to secrecy) that we had broken Japan’s naval codes, and that war with Japan would start sometimes during the first ten days of December.

In November 1940, FDR had been elected to a third term with the pledge that none of America’s son’s would ever fight in a foreign war "unless attacked." Privately, more than once, he had said to others that the Japs must strike the first blow."
 

vista

Electoral Member
Mar 28, 2004
314
0
16
www.newsgateway.ca
Yes they knew it was Pearl Harbour.

Why Marshall advised the press? I don't know.

However, earlier this year Fatherland Security Secretary Tom Ridge sat down with top media personalities over tea and crumpets to discuss how the best report the next terrorist attack.

Managing the news?

Further did they need to drop the bomb?

July 18, 1945 - Truman's handwritten diary "telegram from Jap emperor asking for peace."

...I think you could probably trace [this type of public deception for military purposes] back to Caesar's time. ""

The sinking of the Maine - Spanish/American War; fake Polish soldier - German/Polish invasion; burning the Riechstag by Goring (Hilter) and blaming the communits; Gulf of Tonkin incident - escalation of the Vietnam war

Operation Northwoods

Operation Northwoods under which in 1962, the US Joint Chiefs of Staff put forth a proposal to secure American public support for a war on Cuba - "desirable to use legitimate provocation as the basis for military intervention."

Option 3 A.a: We could blow up a US ship in Guantanama Bay and blame Cuba.

Option 8: It is possible to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner enroute to the United States...

a: An aircraft at Eglin AFB would be painted and numbered as an exact duplicate for a civil registered aircraft belonging to the CIA proprietary organization in the Miami area. At a designated time the duplicate would be substituted for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers, all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft would be converted to a drone.

b: Take off times of the drone aircraft and the actual aircraft will be scheduled to allow a rendezvous south of Florida. From the rendezvous point the passenger-carrying aircraft will descend to minimum altitude and go directly into an auxiliary field at Eglin AFB where arrangements will have been made to evacuate the passengers and return the aircraft to its original status. The drone aircraft meanwhile will continue to fly the filed flight plan. When over Cuba the drone will being transmitting on the international distress frequency a "MAY DAY" message stating he is under attack by Cuban MIG aircraft. The transmission will be interrupted by destruction of the aircraft which will be triggered by radio signal. This will allow ICAO radio station in the Western Hemisphere to tell the US what has happened to the aircraft instead of the US trying to "sell" the incident.

Option 9 b: On one such flight, a pre-briefed pilot would fly tail-end Charley at considerable interval between aircraft. While near the Cuban Island this pilot would broadcast that he had been jumped by MIGs and was going down. No other calls would be made. The pilot would then fly directly west at extremely low altitude and land at a secure base, an Eglin auxiliary. The aircraft would be met by the proper people, quickly stored and given a new tail number. The pilot who had performed the mission under an alias, would resume this proper identity and return to his normal place of business. The pilot and aircraft would then have disappeared.

Haven't we been through this before?
 

Andem

dev
Mar 24, 2002
5,643
128
63
Larnaka
Rick van Opbergen said:
And I guess the Netherlands provoked the invasion of Nazi-Germany to ensure they would get Marshall aid afterwards? (...) Point is: as logical as it may seem (that the Bush government gained positive things from 9/11, and thus they have to be involved in the attacks on 9/11), it does not necessarily have to mean that it's true. Unanswered questions: yes they exist. Vagueness from the side of Washington: yes it exist. Making the conclusion that Washington was involved: premature.

As much as I'd like to put all the blame on George W because he's not a very nice man, I'm inclined to agree much more with what Rick says. It's all very vague and while I don't believe a word the administration says, I can't necessarily believe everything the "conspiracy theory" people say either.. We need facts, I'm sure they will come out in due time.
 

mother66

New Member
Dec 4, 2004
1
0
1
Bollyn unreliable

I participated in both events and Bollyn is mostly accurate in his report. However, he plays factions in an ugly fashion and does not shy away from slanderous and outrageous falsehoods with regard to certain persons. To keep it short, in this article he is kissing a certain rich person's ass and attacking another person (myself) who refused to do so. For the complete details:

http://summeroftruth.org/clearing_the_record.html