There’s ample evidence that Cheney & Co. knew 9/11 was coming. See the Complete 9/11 Timeline by Paul Thompson at http://www.historycommons.org for a large list of mainstream media stories about warnings. The timeline also has the biggest collection of stories about the numerous war game exercises underway during the attacks, including a “plane into building” exercise the CIA was doing at the National Reconnaissance Office near Dulles Airport.

But there’s also a lot of nonsense claims and speculation that discredits the citizen investigation, either through ego, incompetence or malice.

Interesting that someone would post to this blog a suggestion that a white supremacist neo-Nazi should be treated as a credible source on 9/11 issues — Mr. Bollyn (referenced above) wrote for the American Free Press, an organization whose “Barnes Review” subsidiary claims that Adolf Hitler deserved the Nobel Peace Prize and promotes Holocaust denial. We don’t need fascists to tell us what Israeli militarism is doing, nor are they credible sources for anything, even if pieces of what they say contain truth.

John Judge, a long time researcher of deep politics (and assistant to Rep. Cynthia McKinney when she was in Congress) states that “just because someone says the government is lying does not mean they are telling the truth.” This applies especially to the 9/11 truth movement, the sincere adherents understand that it was a covert operation to enable war but get most of the “facts” wrong. There’s virtually no fact checking in the “truth” movement and the defenders of the official story know to focus their attacks on the blatantly ridiculous claims (no planes, thermite, etc) rather than well documented facts that would put the enablers on the defensive (warnings and wargames).

Every major scandal has this sort of dynamic, where false claims are inserted into the public discussion to discredit the best evidence and distract attention away from the most damning material. It was Karl Rove’s speciality to do this sort of thing. it worked to ridicule the investigations into the removal of President Kennedy from office and it is working to ridicule the 9/11 truth movement, too.

An Islamic radical and Egyptian ex-commando, Ali Mohamed, worked at Fort Bragg in the Pentagon’s Special Forces, was an FBI informant and CIA asset, but yet, Ali Mohamed was also:

- Osama Bin Laden’s personal security chief
- Escorted Al Qaeda’s second-in-command, Al-Zawahiri, in the US on ‘fund raising’ trips
- Trained the World Trade Center 1993 bombing cell
- Took the targeting photos of the bombed US African Embassies.

Ali Mohamed has been in US ghost custody since 2000 – meaning, he hasn’t spent a day in prison.

KSM, if you have worked with him, call ALI MOHAMED TO THE STAND so we citizens can hear!

But alas, why do you believe KSM’s trial will be in Dick Cheney’s newly created and secretive “military” commission? (Which is separate from our civilian and military Constitutional justice system—a creation of the Bush Administration and Republican Congress through the illegitimate “Military Commissions Act” of 2006. Do NOT confuse it with real Constitutional based military justice!)

Have you ever heard of the good cop (Obama) / bad cop (Cheney’s) routine?

Peter, I truly appreciate your work. Thank you for letting us read between the lines. You don’t have to vocalize what is obvious, you have done enough for the truth. Ali is the smoking gun link between the US Empire and its Al Qeada hitman squad. Suppressing the KSM trial means indefinite plausible denial-ability.

I consider the events of 9/11 crimes not acts of war. And as such those charged with involvement should be tried in civilian courts with the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and in capital cases I believe the jury must reach a unanimous decision.

The CIA’s 23 operatives were recently tried (in absentia) and convicted of kidnapping in Italy. I would have thought that if they were innocent of the charges they would have mounted a vigorous defense with the CIA supplying the best lawyers. Their failure to present a defense was telling and the failure of the US to honor its extradition treaties with out ally Italy is even more telling.

Trials need to be open, thorough and fair. Secret evidence and evidence gathered through torture should not be permissible and if such evidence exists it should be the basis for prosecution of those involved with torture, a clear violation of the Geneva conventions which are part of US law.

Military tribunals in the case of the Gitmo prisoners are clearly attempts to provide “less justice” and keep lots of evidence from the public. Having said that, I expect a show trial for KSM in the tradition of the USSR or any authoritarian government which uses trials for political agendas.

I’m also troubled by the letter you posted on your website from “the Jersey girls” and the language they used in their support of the civilian trials for KSM and his cohorts, or more accurately, their letter to denigrate those who are opposed to the civilian trials. “Knee-jerk” certainly does not accurately characterize my reaction to Holder’s decision and I am appalled they would cast such a blanket assertion. I saw Holder’s decision coming more than a year in advance, I even sent an email out to some friends and colleagues a year and three days before Holder officially announced the decision, warning of precisely that. If you have any idea how I could contact any of them, I would love to be able to have a discussion with them to iron out any misunderstands from their as well as my perspective. My reaction is also largely supported by your investigative work, thank you for doing such a great job! I attended the Dec 5th Rally in Foley square, and the so called “frenzy” seemed to be created by fairly informed people, not fear mongers. It is an insult, a very deep insult. I would politely ask the Jersey girls not to denigrate us in their future support of these trials, and stick to whatever logic and justification they can conjure that is behind Holder’s decision (since they are still using military tribunals and he said himself KSM and co. could have been tried in either!).

The Fort Hood massacre was not prevented because of political correctness. How fast would it have taken the ACLU to slap a lawsuit on the government had they taken any action against Hasan? The majority of the media barely acknowledge the radical islam side to the story, and Obama urged us not to rush to judgement, and wanted the investigation postponed!

You said the previous terror trials went on without incident. Are you recanting your theory about what potentially took down TWA 800?

As for being against KSM being tried in civilian court, which I am, based largely off my reading of your trilogy. Do you really think anything good will come out of that show trial? If they needed Ali Mohammed to convict KSM, which they don’t, this would never have been moved out of a Military Tribunal. It is most certainly a show trial, because they’ve already admitted that upon the even of an acquittal, they would not be released.

Trying Yousef did nothing to prevent his “planes operation” from coming to fruition. What would you have proposed we would have done with KSM after his capture? Bring him straight to civilian trial? Not interrogate him for intelligence to prevent more attacks?

Nano thermite can be made into a substance applied in the same manner as ordinary paint – rolled, brushed or strayed on.

If this is so and these were some of the explosives used they could have even been applied unwittingly by building maintenance or painting crews doing normal work in the buildings. Who would suspect that applications to steel structure, replacing the asbestos fireproofing which was being removed in a massive project was not in fact nano thermite explosives? If such applications is possible this could easily explain how the buildings core columns were coated with explosives in plain sight.

Or how about the idea that drop in ceiling tiles which were manufactured with a nano thermite coating on the back (unseen side) were also installed as remodeling or routine maintenance. This too could have and would have taken place in the evening when offices were not in use again installed unwittingly by building contractors without drawing any attention to something untoward being done.

The towers were under going the largest elevator upgrade project ever undertaken in the world. And so it would be normal for work to be going on in the core area throughout the entire 110 floors.

All this is speculation and fun to do. But once the notion that the buildings collapsed from office fires started by burning jet fuel is ruled impossible the only culprit IS explosives and the investigation will hopefully provide all the answers.

The key here is to be able to look dispassionately at the events, extract the facts, apply science and math, chemistry, physics, forensic analyses and let the findings speak for themselves.

There are no engineers who can model those collapses from office fires. All attempts leave out important details or set absurd assumptions in their equations. This is dishonest, professional misconduct and fraud.

Look at the facts, do the math, Numbers don’t lie.

Most of us, out here on the frontier, are just waiting for a bunch of heads to roll. Some of us are hoping it’s not our own heads, I guess.

Great job at being born into your lives and making the most of it!

Where’s the proof that you’re not a dumbass?

How do you know what people would have seen?

How do you know how many people it would take?

Oh, I know, you’re the “former truther”, right? That really brings a lot of respect. I wish I could be like you.

I don’t know why you consider Patrick Fitzgerald the gold standard. He is a prosecutor who works with the FBI, relies on them for investigations. How do you suppose one would investigate the FBI?

If you examine the entire process of the terrorism trials/investigations and who the players were such as Mukasy and Chertoff for example, they show up in key “enforcement/policy” posts in the W administration. I don’t trust them and I don’t trust Patrick Fitzgerald.

Do you?

I am not trying to derail your site into a forum to put forth plane vs no plane discussions. And I am not disputing that Peter Lance is reporting on what he has been investigating. He certainly seems to have found many interesting facts.

But since this is about the crime of the century, a crime that became the justification for two wars which led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people, costing trillions, it supremely important to make sure we get the actual perpetrators of that crime.

That begins with the forensic analysis of the crime scene and the as well as the evidence which has been used to “prosecute” the case which took place in the court of public opinion and led to the wars noted above. Our DOJ is about to put KSM et al on trial as the masterminds of that crime.

I would hope that he gets a fair trial and that all the evidence of the crime is brought to bear which points to his and his associates guilt. On the other hand I would hope that you and Mr. Lance would support the introduction of any and all exculpatory evidence.

And there appears to me to be some very troubling evidence in this case. Some of it, such as the destruction of the towers reveals that explosives, not fires from plane strikes, brought the towers down and if this is so, then the conspiracy of the 19 hijackers is inadequate.

I would think that this claim by 1000 architect and engineers and thousands of others needs to be examined at trial and if it proves true, we need to open a new investigation as to what actually happened and who was involved in the planning and execution of that crime.

Mr. Lance’s work seems to conclude that the CIA, FBI the army and other agencies have no culpability other than training AQ and trying to play the double agent game at worst, being incompetent and missed the monsters that they had created, and dropped the ball on monitoring people who they considered dangerous threats to our national security.

Yet no one has even been held or charged with incompetence or dereliction of duties and the focus is on convicting and executing these men, who undoubted have been tortured, abused and brainwashed.

Perhaps Mr. Lance can identity who in the intel business made all these egregious blunders which led to 911 and the events that followed. Even if these men were part of the plot, those who paved the way for it to happen, let it happen or made it happen using these men Mr. Lance needs to complete his investigation because we need the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Will anyone cover this trial live? Since it is the MOST important terrorist case right now, shouldn’t it be getting wall-to-wall coverage? Silly question, I know.

If the jury did find them innocent, I wonder how far the govt. would get in appeals?

And, on the slim chance that the case wasn’t re-tried, how would Obama, Holder and the DOJ spin this?

Oh, a “free admission in an open court” …at Guantanamo–a military prison that tortures its inmates. Wasn’t a man called Omar Saeed Sheikh convicted of killing Daniel Pearl in a British trial that didn’t use torture? After reading about the Moussoui trial “confession” and his subsequent retraction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zacarias_Moussaoui) , I personally am doubtful about trial statements made by these al-quaeda “masterminds.” And additionally, after the Moussoui trial, the judge stated that she “could no longer trust the CIA and other government agencies on how they represent classified evidence in terror cases after Moussaoui case prosecutors admitted that the CIA had assured her that no videotapes or audiotapes existed of interrogations of certain high-profile terrorism detainees, but later, in a letter made public Nov. 13, two such videotapes and one audio tape were made known.” The author seems to take a very hard line on these terrorism suspects. Perhaps my general agreement with SanderO’s take on 9/11 gives me a different outlook.

I’m not sure what all this about Maj. Hasan is proving? Hasan “communicated” with an Imam who talked with alleged 9/11 hijackers, Hasan “interacted with” (I notice that the author doesn’t use the term “alleged” for these hijackers) them directly, and expressed his eagerness to join an Imam in the afterlife? I don’t see how this and “Two degrees of separation between Maj. Hasan and KSM” adds up to criminal conspiracy between them.

In this 2-parter for BoilingFrogs, you say “negligence” a lot. But I think I recall your Timeline and related materials being more forceful, showing that there must have been purposeful, treasonous cover-ups of evidence and willful avoidance of following known evidence to arrests and prosecutions.

SibelEdmonds’ own experience proves other purposeful, willful, treasonous cover-ups of known evidence in the FBI.

Two questions:

1. So, why are you going the safe route here – with mere “negligence”?

2. In a NYC trial of KSM, I would expect the government to ban evidence, including spoken testimony, that indicts important government officials and agencies. Bush and Obama have set the precedents for it. I think you don’t agree with me. Why?

False flags are the big lies they create.”

@SanderO,

And you know this from your career spent designing McMansions in the suburbs?

You were prattling on about how you should be listened in the other thread because you are an architect and the towers didn’t fall without explosives…prattle…prattle… Now you are prattling off cliches about things you have absolutely no clue about.

You bring little to the table here. There are plenty of places on the internet to accommodate the discussions you wish to have (and/or validate your worldview); I ask again, why do you need another here?*

*actually this is a rhetorical question; please just leave.

I only just looked at your About Us and learned that Peter Lance is one of your investigative reporters. While I don’t doubt that he has uncovered much interesting information. His denial of the facts about the fabrications on 9/11 is very troubling.

There are many professionals who have examined evidence presented on 9/11 and determined that there is more than enough “mistakes” (and that is a generous word) to warrant a new investigation. I am one of them and have been an architect for over 38 years.

You apparently discovered corruption within our government and were silenced. I and many others supported you because we believe in truth and transparency.

I would expect that you would demand the same about 9/11.

There is all sorts of interesting things which need some light and are hiding in the shadows such as the work of Christopher Bollyn

http://www.bollyn.com/solving-9-11-the-book

It is an undisputed fact that the CIA has plants throughout the media and that they are there to dis inform and create narratives to infuence public opinions. 9/11 was used to get us into two wars. Coincidence? Or was this orchestrated and planned like the event itself?

Look deeper than the surface. As interesting as the waves are, the depth beneath is what makes up the ocean.

What are you afraid of? What do you know about physics and structural failures? Why do you avoid looking for the truth?

http://www.911blogger.com/blog

but if you use your google and use logic, reason, scientific method, know and check history you can see what is happening. This is not rocket science.

Intel has been largely involved in operations of manufacturing consent – propaganda and controlling the “conventional” wisdom.

False flags are the big lies they create.

Who do they work for? Why are we sending 100,000 men to Afghanistan to eradicate 100 Al Qaeda. Who informs our decision makers, our congress, our executive and forms public opinion? Who is behind all the stories in the media? The army admits to planting and fabricating stories. Who are the military analysts on TV who are scaring you? Who do they work for? Who is benefiting?

Aside from natural disasters, nothing just happens. You need to look deep into the motives and who up and down the chain benefits.

Do you have any other sources for your 9/11 posts here? Please post the links.

Posted by: Clare Swinney

Nationally syndicated talk show host Charles Goyette uncovered blockbuster information in his drive-time interview with author David Ray Griffin.

A center piece of the increasingly apparent BULLSH*T story our government and corporate media have fed us for six long years was a complete fabrication!

We were fed a lie by Ted Olsen who served as Solicitor General for the Bush Administration, when on 9/11 he held a press conference to tell America and the world that his dead wife had called him before her demise from the jet she was on that had just been hijacked.

Personally, I thought it was odd at the time that a man would decide to hold a press conference minutes after hearing of his own wife’s death, when it happened on 9/11. If my own wife had just died, the last thing I’d want to do would be to talk to anyone, let alone call a press conference. It didn’t “smell” right.

truth processing

Now we know why it didn’t smell right. It was a lie. The FBI has reported that no such call between Barbara Olsen and Ted Olsen ever took place on 9/11/2001.

It was part of the rapidly unraveling scam that is the official story of 9/11.

In fact, Griffin went on to explain that there is zero evidence that any hijackers had commandeered a plane at all. True Bush believers will say, whao, wait a minute, we all know they did. How do you know? Because Bush told you.

But, as Griffin rightly points out, in this interview, there is no “EVIDENCE” of their existence.

Which also reveals that mis-information shill, Popular Mechanics, in their 9/11 interview on the Charles Goyette Show months ago, lied when they told us there was DNA evidence of the so-called Muslim hijackers. LIES, all lies.

On the morning of September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 departed Dulles International Airport bound for Los Angeles at 8:20 am Eastern Time. According to reports and data, a hijacking took place between 08:50:54 and 08:54:11[1] in which the hijackers allegedly crashed the aircraft into the Pentagon at 09:37:45. Reported by CNN, according to Ted Olson, wife Barbara Olson had called him from the reported flight stating, “…all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers…”[2]. However, according to Flight Data provided by the NTSB, the Flight Deck Door was never opened in flight. How were the hijackers able to gain access to the cockpit, remove the pilots, and navigate the aircraft to the Pentagon if the Flight Deck Door remained closed?[3]

Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth is a growing organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has analyzed Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the Pentagon Attack, the events in Shanksville, PA and the World Trade Center attack. The data does not support the government story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, there is a growing mountain of conflicting information and data in which government agencies and officials along with Mainstream Media refuse to acknowledge. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow.

Door not opened = plane not hijacked

plane not hijacked = story about hijackers (at least for 77 made up out of whole cloth

If the plane WAS hijacked and hit the pentagon… they the black box data was from another plane (or simulator) which did not hit the pentagon and was substituted – placed there or claimed to be found. This also would be a fabrication. Story was made up out of whole clothe.

Mr. Lance you are speaking about facts which are not facts, but narratives “officials” are telling you. You are passing off lies and are either being used for this purpose or are doing it with intent. Tough spot to be in.

Could Fitzgerald and these others who failed to do their jobs be tried for that? Or it won’t happen due to statute of limitations. Which means the worst would be an “official reprimand”. Or possibly getting reassigned or maybe fired.

What if Ali Mohamed was allowed to testify and told the whole story in open court? How would the public react? Would they do ANYTHING at all to protest this?

I just checked my email. And in what, 6 days I’ve gotten over 100 Tiger Woods emails. The most powerful celebrity in the world (with the most powerful advisors) is striking back at the MSM frenzy. Which means, what are TMZ.com (and all the others) going to do now? There’s only so many ways to talk about his “alleged” mistresses, the scandal, what I would do if I were him, and so on.

Obama keeps marketing (for lack of a better phrase) his fight against “terrorism.” It seemed ironic in his speech last night when he talked about “preserving freedom.” Wiretapping. Recruiting informants on univ. campuses. The lucrative contracts many firms are signing to develop Afghanistan. Developing ski lodge resorts is really going to make the average Afghan sleep better at night? I don’t think so.

The last irony? Even if it turns out that Obama is making lots of money thru defense firm investments, I really think that nobody would do anything. Because to some, nothing will get in the way of their image of The Perfect President.