The Unanswered Questions of 9/11 by James Corbett

unansweredIn his latest weekly address to the nation, President Obama asserts that America’s questions about 9/11 have been answered. If only it were so.

The questions of 9/11 have only continued to pile up higher since that fateful day, and despite official platitudes we are no closer to having those questions answered today then we were when they first arose. In fact, for some of the most important 9/11 questions, the government’s own documents and records that could conceivably answered them have been destroyed, meaning we may never have answers.

The unanswered questions of 9/11 are too numerous to enumerate, but they include:

-Why has NIST classified the data that they used to make their computer animation of the WTC7 collapse? Would knowledge of how NIST believes the building collapsed really “jeopardize public safety“?

-Why did the DIA destroy more than 2.5 terabytes of data on their Able Danger investigation that reportedly identified four of the alleged hijackers years in advance of the attack? Why did the Pentagon buy up and burn the entire first print run of Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer’s book on the program?

-Why did the SEC destroy their records on the 9/11 insider trading question, presumably the most important investigation in the agency’s history?

-Why did the alleged “mastermind” of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, confess not only to plotting 9/11 “from A to Z” but also confess to masterminding numerous crimes that he could not have committed?

-Why did Osama bin Laden repeatedlydeny any involvement in the attacks until a series of mistranslated and otherwise manipulated videos came along appearing to portray him as taking credit for those attacks?

-Why was the report of US State Department official Frank Taylor supposedly proving the case for Al Qaeda’s role in 9/11, which NATO used to justify its invasion of Afghanistan, presented in a classified briefing? Why is that report still classified to this day?

-Why did the 9/11 commission rely so heavily on the confessions extracted through torture which even the Senate’s Armed Services committee points out is specifically used to extract false confessions?

-Why did the CIA destroy 92 videotapes of their illegal torture sessions after being specifically ordered by a court not to do so? Why did the courts eventually absolve the CIA of any culpability for this crime?

-Why did Donald Rumsfeld announce a new “war” on September 10, 2001? What was the reason for the 2.3 trillion missing dollars which the Pentagon had lost up until that point, what did Rumsfeld’s “war on bureaucracy” hope to achieve, how was that “war” hindered when the budget analyst office in the Pentagon was destroyed the following morning, and where are the public records into this accounting scandal?

-Why did Rumsfeld go into a regularly scheduled meeting with a CIA officer in his office on the morning of 9/11, after both of the Twin Towers had been struck by airplanes and it had been determined that “America was under attack.” Why did the highest ranking official in the US military remain in that meeting and unavailable for contact even by his highest staff members as the worst attack on US soil in history continued to unfold? Why did he suddenly come out for a photo op on the Pentalawn after the explosion instead of helping to coordinate the defense of the nation?

-Why is there such a massive discrepancy between the 9/11 commission’s official finding of the time of entry of Dick Cheney into the Presidential Emergency Operation Center on the morning of 9/11 and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta’s testimony of the timing of that arrival?

-Why did the US government contract with Ptech, an enterprise architecture software firm, to install its backdoor access software on some of the most sensitive databases in the US government? Why did they continue to use Ptech even after it was discovered that its sweetheart investor was a specially designated global terrorist on the Treasury’s own terror list? Why did they declare that there was nothing untoward in the software mere hours after raiding Ptech’s offices in 2002? And what was Ptech doing in the basement of the Pentagon on 9/11? What interoperability tests was it running on the link between FAA and NORAD systems on 9/11, and how did that interfere with the FAA and NORAD’s response?

-And, perhaps most tellingly of all, how did four highjacked aircraft fly so wildly off course for such lengthy periods of time without being confronted by a single fighter interceptor, and why did the Pentagon admittedly and on the record lie to the American public about the timing of its response that day?

These and many, many questions like them have been asked by the victims’ family members, the first responders, members of the US military, American congressmen and women, intelligence agents, foreign dignitaries and heads of state, and concerned members of the public across America and around the globe. And still, 11 years after the events themselves, the American president has the gall to suggest that all questions have been answered and it is time for Americans to move on.

On the contrary, Mr. President. Those who are concerned with 9/11 truth and justice will continue to fight on, to answer the questions that your government cannot and will not answer, whether those answers come now, 11 years from now, or generations from now. Those who fight for 9/11 truth will not give up until these questions have been answered. Echoing the words of those brave souls in the wake of that other great American tragedy, the OKC bombing:

“We search for the truth. We seek justice. The courts require it. The victims cry for it. And God demands it.”

For more on the unanswered questions of 9/11 truth, please watch the latest episode of The Corbett Report podcast, “The Meaning of 9/11 Truth

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.


  1. Great questions James. The NIST WTC 7 report covered up, in my opinion the negligence of the designers, planners and builders of WTC 7. The collapse occurred because:

    They built the tower over top a huge con ed sub station. These babies are know to explode… and when the do they release tens of thousands of gallons of flammable and explosive gas. Clever eh? There were vacant lots across the street available when the deal with Con Ed to buy their air rights was made. Probably rammed through with no community board review.

    The design then had to be a “bridge” over the sub station and the tower was built on the bridge span essentially. This involved the used of several massive trusses…. and like a truss bridge failure if one member or connection fails.. as happened in MN over the Mississippi River several years ago… the entire span drops at… you guessed it Free Fall into the water. Those trusses happened to be 100 feet above ground…. very odd coincidence eh?

    The NIST did not examine ANYTHING below floor 8 int WTC 7 including the Rube Goldberg emergency power generator systems which had a series of diesel tanks right under these trusses… and they were fed by 20,000 gals stored adjacent to the…you guessed it the Sub Station.. with riser pipes passing right through the sub station to floor 6&7. This was all a result of America’s Mayor Rudi’s insistence to place his OEM there.

    The take away is that there were the above and other bone headed decisions some folks made (and nicely profited from) which allowed the tower to drop like a lead sinker 8 stories… all kicked off when … imagine this… the plane shorted out the main electrical riser in tower 1 which sent a power surge up stream and started knocking the 8 13.8 kv feeds coming out from the bldg 7 sub station. Shorts there? Exploding switch gear or transformers?

    Ask Jennings or Hess… they were up close and personal when some of the electrical gear exploded BEFORE 10 am…before WTC 1 collapsed.

    The bottom line is that regardless of who flew the planes or even whether there were any planes… the 7 came down because of electric failures and an extemely BIZARRE structural design.

    Even the man who was the structural engineer claimed it collapsed from a diesel fire caused truss failure. He designed them! He should know something.

    NIST tried to divert the reason to upstairs in the *normal* part of the tower from raging fires at column 79. Total bait and switch.

    It was also happening where they REFUSED to investigate.. floor 1-8.

    They don’t protect steel from heat by code and provide sprinklers for nothing. Hot steel is weaker. I’d guess cooking a truss member or connection for 8 hrs might do it. No fire protection on 6&7 I believe and no sprinklers there either (please verify)

    NIST was protecting the guilty against a some massive lawsuits.

  2. Hi SanderO,

    Have you considered writing to the Journal of 9/11 Studies with some of your explanations? I think it would be useful for their group and for those who consume their information to challenge some of their conclusions in a positive manner.

  3. Xicha,

    A few people have suggested I make a formal presentation of some of my research which is now nothing but a few dozen PDF slides. I’ve been on a journey of discovery about what happened at the WTC and of course the larger political impact and cover up and spin which seems to capture everyone’s interest.

    My journey took me quite far into the truth movement where I served for a brief period on the board of directors for AE911T. But that was short lived as I asked too many of the wrong questions and was too concerned about what actually happened (technically) as opposed to selling explosive controlled demolition (CDs, DVDs etc.) AE911T does NOT do technical research… and at best it can be said that they are presenting the *research* of others under the imprimatur of 1500 architects and engineers who they claim they represent. I removed myself from their petition because my interest was in a new investigation not peddling CD theories with little to no solid evidence and with at least some of their evidence DEAD wrong.

    The *mainstream* truth movement is like the interlocking boards of directors we see in corporate America. Need I say more. I was actually expelled from the board and the organization accused of being a cognitive infiltrator as the personification of what Cass Sunstein had predicted. It would be laughable but it’s no joke. I recall Sibel’s firing from the FBI in her book. When you step on the wrong toes, rock the boat you very quickly become a persona non grata.

    And to answer your question… the Journal of 911 Studies is not interested in anything which undermines the MIHOP inside job view of 911. Even the so called LIHOP is considered a limited hang out position marketed by the perps to deflect accountability away from them. But, it seems to me that LIHOP would be treason and the penalty is rather harsh.

    Ultimately the inside job or MIHOP is the real agenda of the truth movement. There is little to no interest in science or engineering which does not support the MIHOP position. Terrorism to the truth movement is a massive false flag multi decade CIA black ops. Don’t get me wrong here, I have no brief for intel and they DO entrap and stage little fake terrorist activities to scare the public periodically lest we forget.

    Science to the truth movement is about cherry picking AND misreading the observables in a way that it supports their forgone CD conspiracy theory which could only be an inside job. Some very credible and respected by me journalists such as Chris Hedges, or Any Goodman are viewed as part of the problem, not the solution and working for the insiders against the noble people in the truth movement. They are passionate but their fervor has made them irrational in many ways.

    The best research about the technical issues of the WTC destruction is to be found at the 911 Free Forum… which bashes any junk science regardless of who presents it… NIST or AE911T, Chandler or Bazant.

    If anyone is interest in my work they can contact me via message or email.

  4. SanderO,

    Thanks for the response.

    I’m wondering how your ideas can be validated. You’re saying the jo911s won’t look at it or respond? Any other peer review ideas?

    I will take a look at the 911 Free Forum.

    I have heard others talk about Bld7 being build on a bridge and having columns missing from a section on the bottom. Then I went and found pictures of the columns that did actually exist.

    As to some of the other things you mentioned:

    Terrorism – please listen to Sibel being interviewed by James Corbett on 12/2/2011, here:

    Amy Goodman – Please take a look at her Syria coverage for the last six months. It’s terrible! As others have surely mentioned, take a look at her funding and decide if she is still a true alternative.

  5. Peace Activist says:

    I have read the article and all the above comment with great interest. I have read many articles and comments about Bld7, but none with any real detail, just basic reiteration of the explosive demolition theory. Although I don’t have any real deep knowledge of things; I can very much personally relate to much of the above comment. I’ve encountered many people who just give you a basic major flag operation theory; and if you don’t simply join in without question, you are one of the conspirators. However even that is not as simple as it sounds; it may be wrong, but it’s part of how it all seems to work. All these people, and there are many give out the innocuous rhetoric that supports the status-quo. I believe the elusive truth of all this may be more complex than many imagine. Many of the people involved may have had far different roles than the official version of things portrays. Perhaps the management of public opinion and that of many of the ‘players’ is a science in its self.

  6. Xicha,
    Thank you for that comment. BF is really not the appropriate forum to deal with the technical issues of the WTC destruction. The official narrative is demonstrably false and this has been established numerous times.

    It’s difficult to re construct what happened from the available public record. But a loot more can be done than what the truth movement has done unfortunately. But there are researchers who are extracting data and analysis from it and getting a more accurate understanding. We clearly would benefit from a new honest no holds barred investigation. Not likely.

    Re Amy Goodman and a few other *lefty* journalists and scholars I wouldn’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. I find most of their work stellar. Syria appears to be very complex with all sorts of layers and I for one have no idea how to make sense of this onion.

    Chris Hedges used to report for the despicable NY Times. But I find his work now spot on, but in a way that he’s trying to get more than the radical left to hear his messages. Preaching to the choir is NOT the medicine this nation needs and I think that Goodman, Hedges, Naomi Klien, and Naomi Wolf, Sibel and others need to and are for the most part using approaches which all American can absorb. I believe Goodman does support a new investigation… but unlike truthers sees (as Chomsky) a march larger crime in the wars and policies in place. As an analogy… we have a problem with police and excessive force and abuse. We can focus on one case.. Diallo, or Sean Bell or any of the hundreds of cases. Goodman mentions and covers them all. But she her over arching message is about the general rise of the police (national security) state, if you will… not just one outrageous incident to the exclusion of all others. Each year she returns to the Attica story. There is so much wrong and she’s doing, as far as I can see the best job bringing this to the attention of the American people and with the www the world. Her work should be embraced instead of asserting that she is a deep state shill. Or to put it another way…

    What is the alternative at the moment?

    The entire discussion about 911 from the technical POV is (un)informed by people who clearly have not enough technical background and /or have not studied the observations and the structure of the buildings and use DATA to inform this conclusions… Way way way too much speculation and it looks like a duck thinking and way too little scientific investigation.

  7. Do you think that controlled opposition exists, or is that an irrational concept?

  8. Xicha,

    I am not sure what the term means. I do believe and it’s often confirmed that the national security state not only spies but infiltrates and has agents inside almost all groups that have a political agenda. They did it to OWS and they do it everywhere. CIA admits to have agents in all media outlets.

    I don’t like it one bit. Not only is it sneaky… but it’s dishonest, and un-democratic… not to mention paranoid.

    We are controlled much more than we believe or want to believe. We have very few real choices and not much of a democracy and our rights are disappearing rapidly. There is strength in numbers of people get together.

  9. Democracy Now has been parroting the un-sourced “rebels report N number of deaths at the hands of government forces…” almost daily in their news for the past six months. I don’t think they have once mentioned the news that was broken here at BFP almost a year ago – that the US has been creating/supporting/arming/guiding/etc the “rebels” from the start, through Turkey.

    I even tried to start a campaign to inform DNow about what they should easily have been able to find out for themselves.

    On the other hand, BFP has had a lot of good coverage of Syria.

    And here is our own James Corbett being interviewed at Global Research, talking about Syria and “the real alternative media”:

    “Devon DB: What is your opinion of the ongoing crisis in Syria?

    James Corbett: The crisis in Syria can only be understood through the lens of what the mainstream Western media is leaving out of their reporting, namely the ongoing, on-the-record support of outside actors in arming, equipping, and training the so-called “opposition” that is currently waging a ground war against the Syrian government.

    This help is coming in the form of equipment and tactical involvement from the US State Department and the CIA, arms and supplies from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, logistical support and operational bases in Turkey, and armed militants associated with Al Qaeda and other Wahabbi Sunni terror organizations from Libya, Iraq, and elsewhere. In this context, the constant demands of Clinton and other Western representatives for Russia to “stop arming Assad” can be seen as the hypocritical and deeply dishonest position that it is.

    In fact, the entire conflict can only be understood when it is seen not as the spontaneous outgrowth of a popular internal resistance, as portrayed by the West, but as a foreign-funded and armed terrorist insurgency whose open terror campaign of car bombings, ethnic cleansing and other war crimes are consistently praised as heroic by the new “humanitarian interventionists” of the neoliberal imperialist set. Given what has taken place in Libya in recent days, those gun-ho interventionists who are currently praising the “Syrian freedom fighters” would be well-served to contemplate who it is they are helping to bring to power in Damascus.”

    There’s much more to read at the link.

    SanderO, your apparently uninformed analogy about Syria may explain why you aren’t aware of the meaning of controlled opposition.

    You can see controlled opposition in the form of Democracy Now. You can also see it in fake whistle-blower NGO’s, like POGO. They give you the appearance of fighting the police state, but will never attack the roots of it, because they receive funding from those same roots.

    Please read more on this in the myriad of articles published here at BFP and at the URL above.

  10. Xicha,

    I can’t speak for DN. I can imagine that many are aware of what happens to you when you push to far. They bring the full weight of the state on you. Sibel was silenced for almost a decade if I recall correctly and refers to herself as the most censored woman in in US history. That’s intimidation and would effectively close down DN.

    I don’t know if DN makes such a calculus. But I wouldn’t be surprised and I don’t think it has to do with their funding sources. You know Karen Silkwood paid the ultimate price for exercising her free speech.

    There is no doubt in my mind that the CIA/ national security state is messing in the affairs of all nations… in different ways. John Perkins reveal much in Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. Jeez Loise we need they have huge black budgets and they are doing more than reading the foreign press and tapping calls. Clearly they want to control the outcome in Syria.

    The so called Arab spring was a long time coming and the Arab *street* pushed back at their oppressors most of whom are propped up by the USA. The USA MIC/intel was not going to allow some sort of democractic *coup* where they had little to no control or influence. Because.. control (of and access to resources) is the name of their game. So obviously when something heats up, Uncle Sam rushes in to make sure we’re best buds with the guys who are going to win… and we make sure they win with all sorts of military *assistance*. And of course the new government is expected to show the proper deference and not look a gift horse in the mouth.

    Power easily corrupts so the US is quite successful in making the coups fall under our *sphere of influence*.

    I don’t think DN is blind to this. I think anyone who has been observing world affairs for the past half century understands this. Read the work of Professor William Blum… he’s a wealth of knowledge about this.

    So yes the CIA is messing with our media, left right and center. But no, I don’t think the left media you cite is a CIA front. Frankly, that’s too paranoid and conspiratorial for me.

    I realized they lie to us when I saw what happened to JFK. I was 15 at the time but old enough to get it. I did not and would not serve in Nam.

  11. I never suggested DN was a “front” for the CIA. I said DN has made the choice not to expose the hand that feeds them. In doing so, just like many others do so, they have become part of the controlled opposition.

    The more people, organizations, and institutions take their responsibility to be honest and truthful, the less dangerous it will be to do it. We have leaders (like Sibel) who are showing us this, telling us this repeatedly (like at BFP).

    We also have a responsibility as consumers of news and information, to demand it.

    How about listening to Sibel’s recent 30 minute interview by Lew Rockwell every morning for the next week, just to remind us of all those points. Have you listened to it, SanderO?

  12. Well, you commented there, so I guess you did. I think the interview contains a great take on the issues in our back and forth here – and I really do recommend a re-run of it. Thanks for the discussion.

Speak Your Mind