LOOK ==>>

The Pentagon Attack Papers

truthjihad.com
Updated November 2010
Pentagon Attack 911

by

Barbara Honegger

Appendix to

THE TERROR CONSPIRACY (Second Ed.) by Jim Marrs

Barbara Honegger, M.S. is Senior Military Affairs Journalist with the Naval Postgraduate School (1995-present), DoD’s graduate science, technology, national security and homeland security university.  This White Paper, as all of the author’s research, publications and presentations on September 11th, are in her capacity as a concerned citizen and do not imply official endorsement.  Honegger served as Special Assistant to the Assistant to the President and White House Policy Analyst (1981-83); was the pioneering Irangate author and whistleblower on the October Surprise (October Surprise, Tudor, 1989); was featured in the Iran-Contra expose documentary “Cover-Up”; and was called as a investigator-witness at both the October 23, 2004 and August 27, 2005 Los Angeles Citizens 9/11 Grand Jury hearings held at Patriotic Hall in Los Angeles, Calif.  Much of the information and analysis contained in this evidence and analysis summary was presented at the L.A. Grand Juries and at numerous 9/11 Truth conferences throughout the U.S.   World 9/11 Truth authority Prof. David Ray Griffin has included the core finding of this white paper – evidence for inside-the-building bombs at the Pentagon on 9/11 paralleling the already-well-known inside-the building explosives at the WTC in New York – in his latest and most definitive expose book on the Sept. 11th attacks, The New Pearl Harbor Revisited (Chapter 2, ‘Reports of Bombs’).  In a previous book, Griffin said that any serious reinvestigation of 9/11 should include the information and analysis contained in this White Paper.  Honegger’s two-hour under-oath videotaped interview/ testimony of key Pentagon eyewitness April Gallop, cited in the below, provided the basis for a critical 9/11 lawsuit filed in Manhattan on Dec. 15, 2008.

The San Francisco Chronicle commemorated the 100th anniversary of the Great California 1906 Earthquake with front-page articles featuring a single iconic image — a charred clock frozen in time at 5:12 a.m. — the exact moment that “The Big One” hit.1 A century after that devastating event, this stopped clock still serves as both the ultimate evidence and the historic icon that “captures it all.”

Today, 100 years later, another series of clocks and watches frozen in time at the exact moment of the violent event at the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001, also “capture it all” and serve as the ultimate evidence shattering the Official Conspiracy Theory of what happened there that terrible morning – and narrows the range of who was really responsible.

Converging Lines of Evidence of a 9:30-to-9:32 a.m. Inside Violent Event at the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001 well before   the Official Story says anything approached and hit the building

The Pentagon was first attacked shortly after 9:30 a.m. – almost 8 minutes before the official ‘impact’ time                                   of 9:37:46, when the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) says a plane hit the building from the outside.

Both DoD and mainstream media first reported 9:43 as the time of alleged Flight 77 impact on the building, and some early reports claiming to quote official sources were as late as 9:48.  Over time, the time given by Pentagon officials  for the claimed outside impact on the building moved earlier and earlier, until it finally ‘settled’ at about 45 seconds after 9:37 (as of the time of  this writing).  But the officially given time has never come close to the actual time of the first violent event at the Pentagon — shortly after 9:30 a.m.  Clearly, if the official story that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon at almost 9:38  were true, Flight 77 could not have been the source of massive damage to the west wedge of the building which occurred  as much as eight minutes earlier.

Multiple standard-issue, battery- and/or electric-operated wall clocks on the walls of the area of the Pentagon attacked on 9/11—including one in the heliport just outside the west wedge—were stopped between 9:30 and 9:32-1/2 by at least two violent events, almost certainly bombs inside the building and/or in a truck or construction trailer parked immediately outside the west face. The   first Associated Press report, in fact, stated that the Pentagon had been damaged by “a booby trapped truck.” The Navy, part of ‘the Pentagon’ itself, posted a photo of the stopped Pentagon heliport clock  on an  official website; and another of the building clocks stopped shortly after 9:30 was in the 9/11 display at the Smithsonian Institution.2 These are just some of the west-section Pentagon clocks that were stopped between 9:30 and 9:32-1/2 on Sept. 11.

In addition, there is April Gallop’s stopped wrist watch.

April Gallop, an Army employee with a Top Secret clearance, was at her desk in the Army administrative area in the west section of the Pentagon on 9/11, the part of the building most heavily destroyed and with the most casualties, when what she said sounded and felt “like a bomb” went off, soon followed by a second explosion.  According to the Pentagon’s own after action report, Gallop’s desk was approx. 30 feet from the inside trajectory of the alleged impactor plane.

“Being in the Army with the training I had, I know what a bomb sounds and acts like, especially the aftermath, and it sounded and acted like a bomb,” Gallop told the author in an under-oath videotaped interview.2A “There was no plane or plane parts inside the building, and no smell of jet fuel.”  In those two hours of under-oath videotaped testimony, Gallop states that the explosion went off at the precise instant that she hit the ‘power on’ button on her computer in the Army administrative area, to which she had just returned that morning after some months of pregnancy and childbirth leave, and that the first explosion stopped her wrist watch just after 9:30 a.m. 2B She has kept the stopped wrist watch in a safe deposit box as evidence of the exact moment of the initial Pentagon explosion.  (Significantly, one of the witnesses to an inside-the-building explosion going off at the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City separate from the outside Ryder truck bomb, Jane Graham, revealed to host Bonnie Faulkner in a Pacifica KPFA radio interview that the moment she pressed the on button on her computer at her desk inside the building, an internal explosion went off.2C The parallel inside-bomb/outside-attack-cover-story modus operandi of the Murrah Building and Pentagon attacks point to the same inside perpetrators being responsible for the planning and execution of both.)

The huge explosion and massive damage experienced by Gallop at/by her desk inside the west section only about 30 feet from the alleged ‘entrance’ hole of the claimed impactor, combined with the fact that the Pentagon’s west outer wall was of heavy masonry that had just been fortified to withstand damage from an external bomb or impactor, make it almost certain that the explosion and internal damage experienced Gallop and other witnesses came from inside, not outside, the building.

Some 9/11 researchers, notably Jim Hoffman, have studied the evidence surrounding the Pentagon attack and, though acknowledging evidence for an explosion not explained by a plane impact or resultant jet fuel combustion, still claim a Boeing 757 or similar aircraft probably hit the building, based predominantly on witnesses who believe they saw a large plane approach and impact the west wedge.  For such witnesses to believe the incoming plane hit the building, however, the large smoke cloud couldn’t have already been billowing above the Pentagon, or they would have known it was due to some other, prior cause.  Thus, if the early 9:30-9:32 inside explosions were the cause of the fireball and smoke cloud, any plane that witnesses saw approaching and believed hit the building had to have approached near-simultaneously, just after 9:30 — no where close to the 9:37:46 official story alleged impact time.

Other 9/11 researchers, notably the Citizens Investigation Team (CIT), assume as fact the author’s original finding that inside-the-building explosion(s) caused the fireball that a number of CIT’s witnesses saw immediately after a large plane passed to the north of the Citgo gas station, contrary to the official story which claims the path was to the south.  But CIT’s witnesses don’t give a time for the plane’s approach, and CIT’s videos and website assume the time to be just before the official story impact time of 9:37:46.  But, again, that’s almost certainly not the case.  If the internal explosion causing the fireball and smoke cloud happened just after 9:30, as marshaled by the evidence here, so also must have the approach of the plane that CIT’s witnesses saw — not at the much later official impact time of almost 9:38.

It is important here to note that internal explosion(s) between 9:30 and 9:32 a.m. on the first and/or second   floors of the west section of the Pentagon are not inconsistent with there possibly having also been a later impact by some airborne object much smaller than a 757/Flight 77 — a piloted plane, unmanned drone, or missile — into the same or a nearby section of the building.  Indeed, if a heat-seeking missile hit the building following the explosions,    the heat from the earlier explosion(s) would have become the target for the missile.  (See below for reports that A-3 Sky Warrior planes were retrofitted shortly before 9/11 to enable them to be remotely controlled, and fitted with missiles.)

As further evidence of internal explosions at the Pentagon on 9/11, survivor witnesses from inside the west section reported that the blast caused its newly-hardened windows to first expand outwards, and then inwards, consistent with an internal-explosion-caused pressure wave7; and the outermost columns closest to where the official story says the right wing of a 757 crashed into the building appear to be blown up and out from the inside, not inward, in photos.

Multiple witnesses also said they smelled cordite after the initial explosion at the Pentagon, an explosive which has a distinct and very different smell from that of burning jet fuel, which would have been the smell if Flight 77 had hit and entered the building. And, as we have already noted, Gallop said there was no smell of jet fuel inside the most-damaged section of the West wedge, where she worked in the Army administrative area, shortly after the first violent event that stopped her watch there shortly after 9:30.  Pentagon eyewitness Don Perkal stated to MSNBC, “Even before stepping outside, I could smell the cordite.  I knew explosives had been set off somewhere.”  Witness Gilah Goldsmith reported, “We saw a huge black cloud of smoke.  It smelled like cordite, or gun smoke.”  And witness Samuel Danner, an AmTrak electrical engineer, was at the site and said he smelled cordite.8 Cordite N — which consists of the main explosive compounds nitroguanidine, nitrocellulose, and nitroglycerin — is cool-burning and produces little smoke and no flash but, like other explosives,  produces a strong detonation shock wave.  Several witnesses also reported seeing a bright silvery flash, which is inconsistent with either jet fuel combustion from a plane impact which produces a bright yellow not white or silvery fireball, or with cordite explosions which aren’t accompanied by a flash.

Even Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld told Sam Donaldson in an ABC News interview shortly after 9/11 that his first thought, being in the building when the initial attack happened, was that a bomb had gone off.  Donaldson asked, “What did you think it was?”  Rumsfeld replied, “A bomb?”

The author also interviewed the famous “lone taxi driver” whose cab is the only car visible still parked on I-395 above the Pentagon lawn looking down at the west face after the other cars have  left the freeway. This taxi can be seen in overhead photos taken on the morning of 9/11 and viewable on the Internet. The driver said his was the last car allowed onto that section of I-395 before police put up a barricade and that he decided not to immediately leave the scene like the others “because I realized this was history and I wanted to see for myself.”  He stated that he saw no evidence of a plane having hit the building nor any visible plane pieces on the lawn at the time he arrived, which was after the first violent event had occurred at the building, as black smoke was already streaming up and to the right from inside-the-building fires.  The taxi cab driver drew a diagram of what he saw that morning while overlooking the Pentagon’s west face from I-395, which the author has retained.

The author has interviewed an Army auditor from Ft. Monmouth , New Jersey , who was on temporary duty assignment at the Pentagon before, on and after 9/11. He was in the Army financial management spaces only minutes before the Pentagon explosion on the morning of 9/11. He had just returned to his temporary office on the ground floor of the adjacent south side of the Pentagon by the cafeteria when he heard an explosion and felt the building shake. Immediately afterwards, he said, hundreds of panicked Pentagon personnel ran by him down the corridor just outside his office and out the South Entrance, yelling “Bombs!” and “A bomb went off!”  The witness has requested that his name not be used in this evidence summary, but is willing to testify to a grand jury or independent official investigation; his name and contact information have been provided to Prof. David Ray Griffin as bona fides for the ‘Reports of Bombs’ section of the chapter on the Pentagon attack, Chapter 2, in Griffin’s book The New Pearl Harbor Revisited, as has the two-hour under-oath testimony-interview with April Gallop.

This Army financial management/audit area was part of or contiguous to the Army personnel office, and this general Army administrative area was one of the two west wedge functions most heavily damaged and with the greatest number of fatalities in the Pentagon attack — the other being the Naval Command Center, more of which below. The day before 9/11, on September 10, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld publicly announced and acknowledged that the Pentagon was “missing” – that it allegedly could not account for and needed to “find” — $2.3 Trillion dollars (other reports have put the amount at $2.6 Trillion). Were some of the auditors who could “follow the money” — and the computers whose data mining could help them do it — intentionally targeted by the inside-the-building explosions at the Pentagon on Sept. 11th ?   In his books, Professor Griffin states that this possibility, first suggested based on publicly known circumstantial evidence by the author, deserves serious investigation.  It is worth noting that the Pentagon’s top financial officer leading up to and at the time of the attacks, Dov Zakheim, who also acknowledged the “missing” Trillions, had a company specializing in aircraft remote-control technology.  As some analyses claim a part found in the Pentagon wreckage is the front-hub assembly of the front compressor of a JT8D turbojet engine used in the A-3 Sky Warrior jet fighter,5 and as Air Force A-3 Sky Warriors—normally piloted planes—were reportedly secretly retrofitted into remote-controlled drones and fitted with missiles in a highly-compartmented operation at an airport near Ft. Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport in Colorado in the months before 9/11,6 the question further arises as to whether Pentagon auditors trying to “follow the money” and their computerized databases were intentionally targeted by inside-the-building explosives on 9/11, with the plane-impact claim as the preplanned cover story.

Once it is realized that the real story at the Pentagon – as in the WTC in New York City – is inside explosives, the possibility that specific offices, functions or even individuals were targeted to be ‘taken out’ becomes very real, whereas the cover story that a Boeing 757 hit the building leads immediately to the assumption — probably desired by the real perpetrators — that any specific deaths and destruction were random.

The Ft. Monmouth Army auditor and his two colleagues were also eyewitnesses to multiple teams of bomb-sniffing dogs and their K-9 handlers in camouflage uniform at the Pentagon metro station just outside the Pentagon at approximately 7:30 am on Sept. 11.  He said that K-9 bomb squads had not been at the Pentagon metro stop before 9/11, or since, but only that day. Since K-9 dog squads don’t usually search for airliners, but bombs, some kind of an explosives attack was apparently anticipated.  Ms. Gallop said she also saw the bomb-sniffing K-9 teams that morning, from the top of the Pentagon Metro stop looking down.  (A possible explanation for the dogs could be advance security for President Bush’s anticipated arrival at the Pentagon heliport, then scheduled for approximately 12:30 p.m. on 9/11.)

As mentioned above, in addition to the Army administrative area, the second most-destroyed area of the Pentagon on 9/11 was the Naval Command Center (NCC).  The Official Conspiracy Theory contained in the 9/11 Commission Report and repeated by the mainstream media states that 44 Naval Command Center personnel were physically present in that space on the morning of 9/11, and that 43 of the 44 died.  The author,  however, was told a very different story by the military officer in charge of the Navy Anti-Terrorism Division in the NCC on the morning of 9/11, Coast Guard Reserve Rear Adm. Jeffrey Hathaway.6A After the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in Aden Harbor in Yemen, Hathaway was put in charge of Navy anti-terrorism force protection and was temporarily assigned to the NCC before the attacks.  Upon the author telling Hathaway that the reported sole survivor of the Naval Command Center on 9/11 was Navy Lt. Kevin Shaeffer, Adm. Hathaway immediately responded that that wasn’t the whole story, and that a secret 19-person intelligence cell in a hardened room at the NCC were also present and that all survived the attack.  Given that everyone officially present in the Naval Command Center, except for Shaeffer, reportedly died – by far the greatest acknowledged fatalities-per-capita of any section of the Pentagon – the possibility immediately presents itself that this secret intelligence cell or function was intentionally targeted by  the internal explosives.  The author queried Army Reserve Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer — author of the expose book  Operation Dark Heart censored by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and a key operative in the pre-9/11 Special Operations Command (SOCOM) intelligence analysis group “Able Danger” that identified two of the three ‘Al Qaeda’ cells allegedly responsible for the 9/11 attacks including ‘ringleader’ Mohammed Atta before 9/11 — as to whether this Naval Command Center intel cell potentially targeted by the inside-the-building explosives was part of ‘Able Danger,’ which the new Rumsfeld Pentagon shut down in late January 2001 immediately after Bush and Cheney took control of the White House.  Anthony Shaffer (no immediate relation to sole OCT Naval Command Center survivor Lt. Kevin Shaeffer, who, following months of surgery and therapy after sustaining 60 percent burns from the attacks went on to be the key staff member on the critical 9/11 Commission subgroup on the Pentagon/DoD response          to the attacks which, in turn, censored not only “Able Danger” but the Pentagon’s inside-the-building explosions as well as NORAD’s hijack-scenario counterterrorism exercises being ‘played’ on the morning of 9/11) said not to his knowledge, but that he would look further into the identity of the 19-or-so member NCC intelligence cell not numbered among the NCC survivors in the official account.

The author also interviewed a Navy public affairs officer assigned to the Naval Command Center before and on 9/11, Lt. Cmdr. David Nunally.  This officer was not in the building that morning, having been temporarily assigned elsewhere, but was quickly called back after the attacks to be the deputy public affairs officer at the underground “back-up Pentagon” location in Pennsylvania near the Maryland border, called Site R. Lt. Cmdr. Nunnally said that Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and later Vice President Cheney were flown to the Site R underground bunker in response to Richard Clarke’s officially declaring “Continuity of Government/Continuity of Operations” (COG/COOP) on the morning of 9/11.  This is confirmed in Clarke’s book, Against All Enemies, which reports that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld chose Wolfowitz to be the designated COG/COOP official at Site R in his stead.  Perhaps significantly, the ‘crash’ site of Flight 93 is not far from Site R and Camp David, which early reports on the morning of 9/11, presumably taken from official sources, said may have been the flight’s intended target (the OCT claims the believed Flight 93 target was the Capitol bldg.) and the airspace around  Camp David, like around Washington, D.C., is a standing ‘shoot down’ area.  Additional information about Site R, on and after 9/11, can be found in James Bamford’s book, A Pretext for War.

The author has interviewed the then Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations on 9/11,    Robert Andrews—the top civilian official in charge of special operations under Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld—a former Green Beret whose office was on the second floor of the south section of the Pentagon, adjacent to the west section.  Perhaps significantly, the pre-9/11 ‘Al Qaeda’-tracking and data-mining operation ‘Able Danger’ was under Special Operations Command (SOCOM).

While drawing the path that he took that morning on a sketch of the Pentagon for the author, Mr. Andrews revealed the following:

Immediately after the second World Trade Center attack of 9:03 am, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld left his office on the Potomac side of the Pentagon and went (merely) across the hall on the same floor to his Executive Support Center (ESC), which is set up for teleconferencing. There, he joined the now-famous teleconference of top government officials run by White House NSC counterterrorism ‘czar’ Richard Clarke out of the White House Situation Room media room.  Clarke, in his book Against All Enemies, confirms that Rumsfeld was among the first officials on this teleconference shortly after the second WTC tower was hit.  Clarke’s account and Andrews’ confirmation of it are thus completely at odds with the Official Conspiracy Theory and the 9/11 Commission report, which claim that no one could “find” Secretary Rumsfeld until approximately 10:30 a.m. when he walked into the National Military   Command Center (NMCC) in the Pentagon.  The fact that Rumsfeld, the military’s top civilian official, was on Clarke’s teleconference with the top official of the Federal Aviation Administration, FAA Director Jane Garvey, also unmasks the complete lie of the official cover story that Air Force interceptors weren’t scrambled in time “because the military and the FAA couldn’t talk each other” on 9/11.  The top-most officials of the Pentagon and     FAA were talking to one another constantly and being recorded on Clarke’s teleconference from as early as 9:15 a.m.  This videotaped Clarke teleconference is thus “The Butterfield Tape” of 9/11 which, not surprisingly, has never been released to the public.  [During the 1970s Watergate scandal, secretly-made tapes of President Nixon’s Oval Office conversations revealed by Alexander Butterfield were the “smoking guns” which forced Nixon to resign or face certain impeachment by the House and trial in the Senate.]

According to Andrews, immediately after the second WTC tower was struck at 9:03 am, he and his aide left his office and ran as fast as they could down to the Secretary of Defense’s West section Counterterrorism Center (CTC), arriving at approximately 9:10 a.m.   While they were in the CTC, a violent event caused the ceiling tiles to fall from the ceiling and smoke to pour into the room.  Andrews immediately looked at his watch, which read approximately 9:35 a.m. but which was set fast to ensure timely arrival at meetings, so the actual time was closer to 9:32.  He and his     aide then immediately evacuated the CTC with the goal of joining Rumsfeld in the Secretary of Defense’s Executive Support Center (ESC) across the hall from Rumsfeld’s main office. He said that Rumsfeld was already on Richard Clarke’s White House teleconference when they arrived.  En route to Rumsfeld’s ESC, Andrews said when he and his aide entered the corridor on the inside ring of the West section, “we had to walk over dead bodies” to get to the inner courtyard.      This is two rings further in towards the center from the inner most purported OCT ‘exit’ hole in the central ‘C’ Ring of the OCT-alleged impact of Flight 77.

Once in the inner courtyard, Andrews and his aide ran as fast as they could to Rumsfeld’s Executive Support Center, where he joined Rumsfeld as his special operations/counterterrorism adviser during Clarke’s White House teleconference. Andrews also said that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld spoke with President Bush while in the ESC.  Whether this was via the Clarke teleconference or by phone or other means was not stated. The fact that Rumsfeld personally communicated with Bush on 9/11 while Rumsfeld was in his Pentagon ESC has been published on an official DoD web site.9

High-Level Official Testimony to the 9:32 Violent Event Time

In addition to the already legion evidence that Flight 77, a large Boeing 757-200 passenger plane, did not hit the Pentagon – i.e. the too-small hole in the west side of the Pentagon being not nearly large enough for the width of the plane’s fuselage, let alone wing width; no visible damage to the lawn where Flight 77 allegedly skidded before  hitting the building on the ground floor; wrecked plane parts at the site identified as being from an A-3 Sky Warrior, a far smaller plane than a 757; Pentagon requests to TV media on the morning of 9/11 not to take up-close images of the building damage, etc. — there is also official evidence for the “too-early-for-the-official-story” circa 9:32 violent event time.

The FAA [Federal Aviation Administration] Timeline document “Executive Summary—Chronology of a Multiple Hijacking Crisis––September 11, 2001” includes the following entry:   “0932:  ATC [Air Traffic Control] AEA reports aircraft crashes into west side of Pentagon.”3 The earlier-than-official-time of 9:32 is the critical fact here, and not the stated cause which was taken from the official narrative and not from any direct ATC eyewitnesses.

On August 27, 2002, then White House Counsel and now Attorney General Alberto Gonzales gave an audio-taped Secretary of the Navy Guest Lecture at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey , Calif., a Department of Defense university, in which he explicitly and clearly states that “The Pentagon was attacked at 9:32.”  A tape of this segment of Gonzales’ talk was played at the 9/11 Emergency Truth Convergence at American University in Washington , D.C. in July 2005, and is on the public record.

Denmark ’s soon-to-be Foreign Minister Per Stig Moller was in a building in Washington , D.C. on 9/11 from which he looked out, heard an explosion and saw the smoke first rise from the Pentagon.  He immediately looked at his wrist watch, which read 9:32 a.m.  He gave radio interviews to Denmark stations the next morning in which he stated that the Pentagon had been attacked at 9:32.4

In the Air Force’s own account of the events of 9/11, Air War Over America, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) general who finally ordered interceptor jets scrambled on 9/11, although too late, Gen.          Larry Arnold, revealed that he ordered one of his jets to fly down low over the Pentagon shortly after the attack there      that morning, and that this pilot reported back that there was no evidence that a plane had hit the building.  This fighter jet—not Flight 77—is almost certainly the plane seen on the Dulles airport Air Traffic Controller’s screen making a steep, high-speed 270- to 330-degree descent before disappearing from the radar.  When a plane flies low enough to go undetected, usually at or below 500 feet, it is said to be flying “under the radar.”  The Pilotsfor911Truth website and       their Pandora’s Black Box video documentary have determined from official data released by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) that the true altitude/height of the plane represented by the blip seen on the Dulles ATC screen was 476 feet — way to high to have hit the Pentagon at all, let alone its ground floor, but, significantly, it was in just the height range to been seen by controllers to have just gone off radar so it could be said to have crashed into the building.     Military pilots—like the one sent by Gen. Arnold on 9/11 to report on the Pentagon’s damage—are trained to fly at approx. 500 feet above ground in order to evade radar detection.  In fact, when the Air Traffic Controller responsible for the plane and her colleagues watched the extremely difficult 330-degree maneuver (originally claimed to be a 270-degree maneuver, since updated) on her screen, they were certain that the plane whose blip they were watching perform this extremely difficult feat was a US military aircraft, and said so at the time. It almost certainly was.

Thus, the likely reason the Pentagon has refused to lower the current official time for “Flight 77” impact, 9:37:46 — usually ‘rounded down’ to 9:37 in mainstream press reports — to the 9:30- to 9:32-range actual time of the first explosions there — is that they decided to pretend the blip represented by Arnold’s surveillance jet was “Flight 77.” Also, the official cover story claims that the alleged 9:37 impact was the only Pentagon attack that morning, yet by the time     Arnold’s surveillance jet arrived on the scene, at least the first internal violent event had already happened, so the Pentagon cannot acknowledge the actual earlier 9:30-9:32 time without revealing an attack on the building prior to the Official Conspiracy Theory’s alleged outside impact.

Even the famous Naudet brothers’ video of the first attack of 9/11, on World Trade Center 1 in New York, shows, at the 42:27 mark that there were reports at 9:30 that the Pentagon had been hit.4A

There is even some evidence of internal explosions prior to 9:30.  Pentagon police officer Roosevelt Roberts Jr. was watching the NYC attacks on TV when he got a call from his sergeant telling him that the Pentagon had gone to ThreatCon Delta and then just as he hung up the phone “at experienced a violent explosion “at 9:12 or 9:11” as if “it was almost timed for precision,” after which dust fell from the ceiling of the east loading dock where he was working and he heard people screaming.

Significantly, all of this also happened just after 9:30 a.m. (from The Complete 9/11 Timeline at www.HistoryCommons):

* After an inexplicable delay during which they knew that both WTC towers had been attacked, the Secret Service suddenly acted as if the 9/11 attacks were “real,” rushing President Bush out of the library at the Florida school where they had allowed him to continue to read to children as much as 10 minutes after being told by Ari Fleischer that the second New York tower had been hit.

* Firefighters were suddenly ordered out of WTC 1 in New York City.

* The New York Stock Exchange was ordered closed.

* The takeover of Flight 93 reportedly began, with the stabbing of a flight attendant and one of the alleged hijackers announced that there was a bomb on board, picked up by air traffic controllers.

But perhaps the most damning evidence for the Sept. 11 attacks being an inside job is that the actual attacks were mirrored by NORAD/Air Force hijack-scenario counterterrorism ‘exercises’ being conducted by NORAD’s (an Air Force agency’s) North East Sector (NEADS) on the morning of 9/11 itself. The author’s original research and analysis first revealed the NEADS hijack-scenario exercises that ‘went live’ on 9/11 as the modus operandi for the planning, execution and cover-up of the attacks, credited as ‘The Holy Grail’ of 9/11 research by author Michael Ruppert in his early 9/11 expose book Crossing the Rubicon.

Critically, the author has recently interviewed White House NSC counterterrorism ‘czar’ Richard Clarke, who confirmed that NORAD was conducting hijack-scenario exercises in the N.E. Sector – where all three NYC, Pentagon and Pennsylvania attacks took place – on the morning of  9/11 to an audience of 75, published on an official DoD website.4B The key excerpt from that article:

“Regarding 9/11 itself, Clarke noted that part of the little known history of that day was confusion by NORAD’s North East Sector, which was about to conduct an exercise on a partial hijack scenario as the actual hijackings began, as to whether the unfolding events were ‘real world’ or part of the exercise – a confusion whose cause bears an eerie similarity to the ‘arm reaching out of the computer’ danger Cyber War [Clarke’s latest book]    warns about.  “Yes, this happened on 9/11, and it happened with TWA Flight 800, when the Navy was doing a sea search exercise in the very area where the plane went down…I wouldn’t have been able to respond the way we did on 9/11 if we hadn’t exercised it five times.”

Also critically, the operational head of NORAD NEADS on 9/11, Bob Marr, has also now publicly acknowledged that his agency was conducting a planehijack-scenario counterterrorism  exercise on the morning of 9/11.4C

It is impossible for the U.S. Government to have not been able to “imagine” using planes as weapons when its own military was practicing how to defend against exactly such a hijack-scenario attack on the morning of 9/11 itself.  Impossible.

On February 4, 2004, the author interviewed Air Force General Ralph Eberhart, Commander of NORAD on 9/11, about NORAD’s hijack-scenario exercise on the morning of 9/11. To the author’s knowledge, he has granted no other interview since the events of September 11. Before asking questions, Gen. Eberhart was given copies of all mainstream press articles published as of that date on the subject of the confusion on 9/11 of his Northeast Sector (NEADS) personnel running NORAD’s “Vigilant Guardian/Vigilant Warrior” emergency response exercises that morning.  As of the date of the interview, therefore, the then head of NORAD was made aware of  the initial confusion by his own NEADS “game” players on 9/11 between incoming exercise reports and incoming reports of actual hijacks.

The author first asked Gen. Eberhart if there was any connection between NORAD’s “Vigilant Guardian/Vigilant Warrior” exercise being run on 9/11 and the plane-crashing-into-tower emergency response exercise simultaneously being held at National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) headquarters outside Washington, D.C.12/first cite He replied, “No.”  This response was surprising, as a large percentage of NRO personnel are reportedly from his own agency, the Air Force.  He was asked for reconfirmation, to which he again said, “No.”  Laying the ground for the next question, the author mentioned that NEADS’ “exercise” director on the morning of 9/11, Lt.  Col. Dawne Deskins, has   said that she was confused as to whether initial reports of the hijacked planes on the morning of 9/11 were “real world”    or “part of the game.”  This, the author noted, showed that the NORAD exercises that morning had to have been on a hijack scenario at least similar to the actual attacks, as otherwise   there wouldn’t have been any grounds for confusion. After considering this for a moment, Gen. Eberhart refused to answer any further questions and abruptly ended the interview.  As we have seen above, subsequent to the initial publication of this white paper in the first printing of The Terror Conspiracy, NORAD officials confirmed that their ‘exercise’ on the morning of 9/11 did, indeed, include a hijack scenario (Touching History, pp. 24-27).

Explosive Revelations Regarding the WTC Attacks

Millions in the U.S. and around the world now know World Trade Center Towers 1 and 2 as well as WTC Building 7, not hit by any plane, fell due to controlled demolitions using pre-planted super-military-grade thermite explosives pre-planted inside the buildings, to which ‘Al Qaeda’ could never have obtained access – especially to WTC 7, which housed multiple U.S. Government agencies including the CIA, FBI, Secret Service, SEC and even NYC Mayor Giuliani’s own Emergency Operations Center from which emergency counterterrorism responses were to have been run – thanks to the impeccable and courageous efforts of Prof. David Ray Griffin and Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (www.ae911truth.org), among others.  Over 1,300 licensed architects and engineers have signed Architects & Engineers’ petition calling for a new, truly independent investigation of the events leading up to and on 9/11.

Among the most explosive revelations of what really happened at the World Trade Center on  Sept. 11 is WTC 7 owner and WTC 1 and 2 lease-holder Larry Silverstein’s admission, in an interview on PBS Television that the NYC “fire department commander,” after a discussion in a phone call with Silverstein late on the afternoon of 9/11, made the decision “to pull [the building, a professional term for triggering the controlled demolition of a structure with preplaced explosives] and we watched the building collapse.”  This claim takes on sinister dimensions when combined  with the below inside information received from American Helicopter Society Executive Director M.E. Rhett Flater, who knows many of the principals involved:

“The NYC Police [Dept.] had two Bell 412’s [helicopters] equipped with hoists and rescuers in the air on 9/11 next to the WTCs.  One of these was the same 412 and police crew which assisted with rooftop rescues when one of  the buildings was attacked by Al Qaeda bombers several years earlier [in 1993].  The NYC Fire Department, which has no love for the NYC Police Department, assumed jurisdiction and denied access to the roof by the NYC Police helicopters.  Complicating matters, the rooftop doors were [double] locked prior to 9/11 at the direction of the NYC Fire Department.  As a result, there were no helicopter rescue attempts.  When a fleet of Sikorshy U-60L Black Hawks arrived from Stratford with medics and supplies, they were ordered to a local airport and directed to stay away from the towers.  The same was true of other rescue attempts by civil and military and paramilitary helicopters.” 9A

Amazingly, the pilot of one of the NYC Police Department helicopters who sent two of his crew members down to the WTC 1 roof to rescue survivors after the basement bombing of the building in 1993, Det. Greg Semendinger, was the official NYPD photographer in one of its four helicopters circling around the Towers on 9/11, and expressed ‘surprise’ that there was no one on the roof to rescue9B, though it was well  known – even infamous – throughout the Police Department that the NYC Fire Department had ordered the roof doors double-locked.  Further, Semendinger’s helicopter that morning was equipped with the same winch and foldable rescue seat he had used to rescue almost two dozen from     the WTC roof eight years earlier.  Of the 2,770 photos Semendinger took from the NYPD helicopter on 9/11, which were provided to the National Institute of Standards and Technololgy (NIST) as background for their report that refused to   even consider the controlled demolition hypothesis for what caused the Towers to fall and which NIST then provided to the 9/11 Commission, and which subsequently were given to ABC News as a result of its FOIA demand, only 24 have been released to the public (see above link).  The remaining 2,746 photos almost certainly contain literal ‘smoking guns’ and need to be forced into the public domain by a new, truly independent investigation of Sept. 11.

Putting two and two together, the NYC Fire Department commander(s) who ordered the WTC 1 and 2 rooftop doors double-locked — closing off the only hope of escape for victims caught above the point of the plane impacts and fires, many of whom were forced to jump to their deaths – also refused to allow NY Police Department helicopters equipped and ready to rescue anyone able to get to the roofs – or any of the other dozens of civilian, military and paramilitary helicopters that rushed to Manhattan ready to rescue them – to do so; and, after talking with WTC 7 owner Silverstein, ordered that that building be destroyed by classic remote-controlled demolition.  And what’s ‘good’ for the goose (WTC 7) is ‘good’ for the gander (WTC 1 and 2): i.e., it is almost certain that Silverstein and the NYC Fire Department Commander also made the decision to bring down WTC 1 and 2 by controlled demolition earlier in the day.

This is a High Evil forcing a “devil’s alternative” on the victims caught above the plane impacts and fires that would make Hitler’s SS jealous with rage.

To add fuel to the fire, Fox News reporter and former Gannett News journalist Jeffrey Shapiro has claimed that NYC Police Department officials told him late on the afternoon of 9/11 that Silverstein also was on the phone with his insurance company trying to talk them into approving the controlled demolition destruction of WTC 7, the one WTC structure he owned outright, using language similar to that Silverstein told PBS he and the Fire Department Commander had used as the pretext for ‘pulling’ the building (http://www.prisonplanet.com/bombshell-silverstein-wanted-to-demolish-building-7-on-911.html ).

Further, WTC janitor William “Willy” Rodriguez, the last non-emergency-responder to leave the WTC alive on 9/11, has testified that he was in the first basement level of the WTC when an immense explosion went off below him in the even-deeper subbasement level(s) of the building a few seconds  before the plane hit the tower high above.10 Just as Robert Andrews revealed that the West-side sub-level of the Pentagon was damaged at approximately 9:32 a.m. on 9/11, and as we know that the cause of the first 9:32 a.m. Pentagon attack was not an impact event but inside explosives, there thus are eye- and  ear witness reports of bombs going off in both the Pentagon and the WTC underground level(s) before either were hit by anything from the outside.

As no “outside” terrorist, al Qaeda or otherwise, could have had access to either the Pentagon or the sustained advance access needed to pre-place explosives inside the WTC, only domestic insiders could have pre-placed the explosives in both the Pentagon and the WTC.  Further, because the WTC1 deep-basement explosions(s) experienced by Willy Rodriguez happened before the tower was hit by a plane; as any incoming plane not controlled by the same agents that triggered the sub-basement detonation(s) could have veered off from the building at the last second thereby ruining the plane-impact-as-cover-story for the later building collapse; and as the sub-basement explosions were necessary for the actual later collapse of the buildings by controlled demolition, the same domestic U.S.  insiders had to have controlled both the internal sub-basement detonations and the incoming plane(s). Thus, even if al Qaeda hijackers were on the incoming planes, they were not in control of the final approach and impact of the planes, which had to have been 100 percent guaranteed and thus 100 percent controlled by domestic U.S. insiders to ensure that, once the WTC1 sub-basement explosions went off, the plane could not veer off and miss the building ruining the plane-impact-and-fires cover story for its collapse.  This fact is crucial, as it can take jurisdiction for the mass murders at the WTC out of the   hands from the FBI, which oversees crimes committed in the air, as a compelling legal argument can be made that    the real crime of controlling the planes’ impacts into the towers was committed by ground controllers in a terrestrial building or vehicle.  In fact, it has been reported that just-former FBI top ‘Al Qaeda’ hunter John O’Neill, who began his new job as head of security for the WTC on 9/11, told his assistant in his last phone call from the towers that the    planes were being controlled “from the ground.”  If so, this places the jurisdiction of the crime of the WTC mass murders squarely with the State of New York, as murder is a State crime and multiple mass murders are the sum of individual State crimes.  And because the controllers of the timing of the WTC 1 basement-level explosives had to have also been the controllers of the final approach and impact of the planes, and the former was arguably, and provably with legal discovery and subpoena power, on the ground and not in the air, a Manhattan Grand Jury can be given the case and pull the jurisdiction for the Bush-Cheney Reichstag Fire out of Federal jurisdiction.

Because the real modus operandi of both the Pentagon and WTC attacks are the same — inside explosions with plane-impacts-and-fire cover stories — it is logical to deduce that the same insider terrorists were responsible for pre-placing and detonating the explosives inside both the WTC and the Pentagon.   That is, a single group of US-domestic conspirators—not al Qaeda or any other outside terrorists—almost certainly planned and executed both the WTC and Pentagon attacks, which significantly narrows the range for the identities of the real perpetrators.

In addition to the already well known and officially acknowledged evidence of Bush Administration foreknowledge of the broad outlines of the September 11 attacks – i.e. advance warnings from intelligence agencies of as many as 11 foreign countries and the content of the now-famous August 6, 2001 Presidential Daily Brief (whose 10-page attachment still has not been made public), etc. — there is strong evidence that Bush-Cheney administration insiders had near perfectif not  complete — advance knowledge of the planned attacks and both mirrored them by controlling the actual attacks under cover of the 9/11 hijack-scneario ‘exercises’ and chose the date for the actual attacks, which was therefore also the date for the exercises.

(Note:  The fact that Bush Admin. insiders had advance knowledge of the details of a planned “outside” attack, as detailed below, is not inconsistent with these insiders having facilitated and even orchestrated the actual attacks to both ensure they happened ‘successfully’ and to blame them on the planners.   That is, the real plot behind the Sept. 11 attacks is similar to that of the Nazi Reichstag Fire, through which Hitler rapidly consolidated power, which was its purpose.  Like the Nazi-facilitated Reichstag fire, the above and below evidence makes it highly likely that the true story of Sept. 11 is that there was a real though highly-unlikely-to-succeed “outside” plot about which U.S. and         allied intelligence gained detailed advance knowledge and the Administration then secretly protected and enabled the plot to ensure not only that it succeeded, but succeeded spectacularly as the psychological operation needed to justify the entire subsequent Bush-Cheney global-military and domestic-surveillance agenda.

Below is just some of the compelling evidence that the Bush-Cheney Administration had detailed advance knowledge of the attack plans:

1) Shortly after September 11, Newsweek reported that before 9/11, the Bush Administration initiated a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court surveillance/tap of “up to 20” suspected al Qaeda-linked terrorists then in the U.S., but that then FISA Court Chief Justice Royce Lamberth subsequently ordered the then-already-ongoing surveillance stopped. This can only mean one thing –that the Bush Justice Dept./FBI/NSA initiated the tap before asking the FISA Court for a warrant for it, as with the now-famous post-9/11 NSA taps initiated by the Bush administration without first applying for FISA warrants.

As “up to 20” is a clever way of saying “19” without making the link to 9/11 explicit, the Bush Administration Justice Dept/FBI/NSA almost certainly initiated surveillance of all 19, or close to all 19, of the soon-to-be alleged 9/11 hijackers before 9/11, and probably did so based at least in part on the findings of Special Operations Command’s “Able Danger” data mining intelligence operation which Bush and Rumsfeld ordered shut down just after taking office in late Jan. 2001. Though Judge Lamberth ordered the surveillance ended once the administration filed the formal warrant application, there is evidence that the Bush administration ignored his order to cease the tap and continued its surveillance of the alleged 9/11 hijackers up to and including the day of 9/11:

Zacarias Moussaoui—the only person indicted by the Bush Administration for anything even related to 9/11—has stated in court filings that both he “and my (al Qaeda) brothers” then in the U.S. were surveilled by the   Bush administration before 9/11 and that the Bush Administration knew he could prove it.  How could this be the case?  If Moussaoui was one of the “up to 20” al Qaeda-linked terrorist suspects the U.S. surveilled before 9/11   without an advance FISA warrant, as reported by Newsweek, then Moussaoui was also one of the “up to 20” whose warrantless surveillance Judge Lamberth ordered stopped.  Moussaoui, after all, was originally named                as the “20th hijacker” of the 9/11 plot. Amazingly, the FISA Act requires that, if the FISA Court rejects a surveillance that was initiated before a warrant has been applied for, as in this case, the court must inform “the target(s)” of the surveillance and give him/them the government’s stated reason for initiating the tap in the FISA application.  Thus Moussaoui can “prove” the Bush Administration/FBI initiated surveillance on him before 9/11 because, it can thus      be deduced, the FISA Court itself — or some U.S. agency it ordered to do so on its behalf — told him so after Lamberth ordered his surveillance and that of the other “up to 20” plotters stopped.  Those other “19 or so” plotters who were required by law to have also been officially informed before the attacks that they had been surveilled and for what stated  reason would have also included Mohammad Atta, Ramzi Binalshibh and all of the other official story hijackers.  And because it was almost certainly the FBIthat surveilled the “19 or 20” inside the U.S. without warrants before the attacks, explains why the FBI was able to so quickly identify the 19 official-story hijackers immediately after the attacks, though it falsely claimed they knew nothing about the hijackers ahead of time and that the attacks were a complete surprise.

Given the above, the fact that the FISA Court was required to inform most or all 19 of the “up to 20” alleged  9/11 hijackers before 9/11 that they were being surveilled by the Bush Administration—and the reason for such surveillance — throws new light on the claims by the Pentagon’s then-secret data mining task force“Able Danger” to have tracked lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta and at least four of the other 19 hijackers beginning in January 2000, when Atta actually did enter the country according to Daniel Hopsicker’s taped interview with Atta’s live-in girlfriend Amanda Keller reported in his book Welcome to Terrorland. The FBI falsely claimed, and still falsely claims, that Atta did not enter the U.S. until the summer of 2000, six months after he actually did so.  The likely reason for this intentional lie about when Atta first entered the country is what Atta is known to have done while inside the U.S. between January and the Summer of 2000.  Hopsicker reveals that, among other activities, Atta visited Portland , Maine , in March, 2000, and perhaps even earlier.  An abiding “mystery” of the official 9/11 cover story is why Atta drove to this very city — Portland , Maine — on September 10, the day before 9/11, and then flew from Portland to Boston early on the morning  of September 11.  The answer to this “mystery,” which the FBIclearly already knows, is the link between what Atta      was doing in Portland before the Bush Administration said he was even in the country, as well as what he was doing there the day before 9/11 and early on the morning of 9/11.  This probably has something to do with the fact that the         CIA reportedly runs secret flights out of an airport in Portland , Maine , and that “rendition” detainees have said they were flown out of the country on special jets after first stopping at Portland ’s International Jet Port.12

2) The FBI’s top bin Laden/al Qaeda hunter until shortly before 9/11, John O’Neill, “happened” to be at the same hotel in the same town near Tarragona , Spain in mid-July 2001 just before lead hijacker Mohammed Atta and 9/11 plot “coordinator” Ramzi Binalshibh arrived  there.  Some Bush administration officials now also believe that 9/11 “mastermind” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) met there for what the 9/11 Commission calls “the Final 9/11 Planning Meeting.”  This cannot be—and is not—a coincidence.  O’Neill, who was in close contact with German intelligence — Atta led the “German cell” for the 9/11 attacks — and Spanish intelligence, clearly had been alerted to the upcoming “Final Planning Meeting” meeting and was at the hotel to surveil/ tap/bug the room and/or monitor the surveillance/taps/bugs of German and/or Spanish intelligence  where it was about to be held.  O’Neill and his agency, the Bush-Cheney Administration’s FBI, thus knew every detail — or nearly every detail, see below — of the planned 9/11 plot at least two months in advance of the attacks.

Perhaps just as significantly, European media reported that bin Laden was in an American hospital in Dubai incapacitated for surgery during precisely this same mid-July 2001 period of the Spanish ”Final 9/11 Planning Meeting.”  Reportedly, bin Laden was visited in the hospital by the CIA’s then UAE station chief.  The question naturally arises whether bin Laden was telephoned by Atta, Binalshibh and perhaps even also KSM, or visa versa, while the latter were at the “Final 9/11 Planning Meeting” in the hotel that O’Neill had pre-bugged.  If so, then O’Neill, the FBI, and the highest levels of the Bush Administration—including O’Neill’s then boss Attorney General Ashcroft, who suddenly stopped flying commercial aircraft about this time—knew not only every detail of the 9/11 plot as of that date, but almost certainly recorded all the key conspirators plotting their “final plans” including possibly bin Laden himself, on tape—clearly another “Butterfield” tape to be demanded by subpoena in a new 9/11 investigation. In fact, former FBI translator and 9/11 whistleblower Sibel Edmonds has revealed, based on documents she saw as part of her official duties, that bin Laden himself was working for the U.S. up to and on the day of  9/11 itself.  This almost certainly is the reason the FBI has never listed bin Laden as wanted for 9/11 on its  “Most Wanted Terrorists” web page, and why the FBI’s chief investigative spokesman Rex Tomb has said the reason bin Laden is not officially wanted for 9/11 is because there is no real evidence linking him to the attacks.

That is, there may be, and probably is, evidence linking bin Laden,Binalshibh, KSM and Al Qaeda to a 9/11-like plot and planning, but not to the actual attacks, as they were physically carried out by insiders under cover of U.S. Air Force counterterrorism “exercises” that mirrored the “final plans” discussed at the July 2001Tarragona meeting.  As noted above, on 9/11 itself the U.S. military was conducting NORAD emergency response exercises on scenarios involving plane hijacks, and the NRO was conducting an emergency response exercise on the scenario of a plane crashing into one of the towers of is headquarters just outside Washington, D.C.11 where many NRO personnel are from the Air Force and CIA.  It is next to impossible for this to have been the case unless the exercises were intentionally scripted to mirror what had been learned  from the above-mentioned detailed advance intelligence.  That is, the “cover-story” purpose of the military exercises held on 9/11 was to practice how to defend against the very attacks that John O’Neill’s Tarragona meeting surveillance, the Pentagon’s “Able Danger” data-mining operation and the FBI’s pre-attack FISA-warrant-less surveillance of the “up to 20” (19) suspected al Qaeda terrorists had already revealed. You don’t practice defending against something in multi-million-dollar hijack-scenario exercises on the morning of 9/11 that you “can’t imagine.”

A few paragraphs above it was stated that, because of O’Neill’s surveillance of the Al Qaeda mastermind’s and lead hijacker’s “Final Planning Meeting” in Tarragona, Spain, he and the Bush-Cheney FBI knew nearly every significant operational detail of the plot.  The one “burning” exception to this, however, is the date of the 9/11 attacks.  Perhaps the most compelling proof of active Bush administration complicity in 9/11is that lead hijacker Mohamed Atta took the information to this critical mid-July “Final 9/11 Planning Meeting” that “the date [for the attacks] has been set”  — i.e. set by someone else other than Atta) — and that he, Atta, didn’t yet know it, but would “know it” in five to six weeks, by late August  2001.13 Atta was clearly waiting to learn the date of what the Bush Administration and 9/11 Commission allege was “his own” attack.  This last key piece of the puzzle fell into place during the first phase of Zacarias Moussaoui’s sentencing trial, in the 58-page transcript of  “ 9/11 mastermind” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s interrogation “testimony” read into the trial record by the Bush Department of Justice prosecution.  In this transcript, KSM says that he and bin Laden “allowed Atta to choose” both the final targets and the attack date.”14 However, from what Atta said to Binalshibh and probably also to KSM and possibly even  also to bin Laden by phone at the “Final Planning Meeting” in Spain, we know that Atta did not set the attack date, as he was waiting to learn it five to six weeks after that mid-July “Final Planning Meeting.”  Putting two and two together from the above, therefore, we know that neither bin Laden nor alleged “mastermind” KSM nor alleged “coordinator” Binalshibh set the date for “their own” attacks, though setting the date of an attack is the one thing that translates a mere plan – a plot or conspiracy — into reality.  That is, none of the top alleged “outside” conspirators set the date for the September 11 attacks.

So if the “9/11 conspirators” didn’t set the date to turn their plot into a reality, who did?

The key and central fact of the entire 9/11 plot is that the attack date Atta was “waiting for” was the date of the Bush Administration’s planned counterterrorism exercises, which, in a vicious circle, were scripted to mirror Atta’s and Binalshibh’s attack plan gleaned via advance intelligence obtained from O’Neill’s surveillance of the “Final 9/11 Planning Meeting” near Tarragona, from the Pentagon’s “Able Danger” tracking of Atta and other of the 19 hijack-plotters, and the FBI’s warrantless surveillance of Atta and other of the about-to-be a lleged hijackers.  And because Atta was “waiting to hear” the attack date, which was the hijack-scenario U.S. military exercise date, Atta was the sole plotter to whom the Bush Administration finally chose to tell the actual attack date – Sept. 11th — as soon as it was selected, and he bought his one-way ticket as soon as he learned it, in late August 2001, just as he had predicted at the “final planning meeting.”

The No. 1 inside conspirator, therefore, is whoever gave the Pentagon’s own hijack-scenario counterterrorism exercise details and their date — Sept. 11 — to Mohamed Atta or to a middleman who, in turn, gave the date to Atta.  

Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed, then head of Pakistan ’s military intelligence agency ISI, is the prime suspect for a second-level middleman who laundered this No. 1 inside-conspirator’s NORAD hijack-scenario exercise date to Atta.  On the morning of 9/11, Ahmed was in Washington, D.C. having breakfast with future CIA Director Porter Goss and Senator Bob Graham, soon to co-chair of the joint House-Senate “investigation” of the 9/11 attacks, and had met with CIA Director George Tenet and with top officials at the Pentagon, about to conduct the exercises, in the few days leading up to 9/11.  He is therefore the most likely person who was told the date and details of the Pentagon’s hijack-scenario emergency response exercises and communicated them, directly or via an intermediary,  to Atta, as Ahmed also approved wiring $100,000 to Atta shortly before 9/11.  (Interestingly, it has been reported   that $100,000 is an amount the FBI often pays to key informants).  It is also known that Atta then confirmed 9/11 as the date for the exercises—which was to be the date for the attacks—in his now-famous NSA-intercepted call with KSM of September 10, 2001, in which he related “The Match is about to begin.  Zero hour is tomorrow.”  “Match” is a way of saying “exercise” or “game.”  This critical September 10th telephone intercept was almost certainly made without an advance FISA warrant, putting the lie to then NSA Director and later CIA Director Air Force Gen. Michael Hayden’s patently false claim that the “first” warrantless taps were initiated only as                    a defensive response to 9/11 following the attacks.

Another abiding “mystery” of September 11 is why Gen. Eberhart, the commander of NORAD on 9/11, claimed to the 9/11 Commission that on the morning of 9/11 NORAD was conducting, among others, a preplanned “Soviet-era” emergency response exercise15 in which U.S. fighter jets were to defend against “Russian” nuclear bombers played by a U.S. military “Red Team” planes.  Why “Soviet era”when the Soviet Union had ceased to exist ten years before? He didn’t say “Russian,” he said “Soviet.” This is very strange until one discovers that, despite repeated official and media claims that Sept. 11 was “completely unique” and that the skies over America had “never before”          been cleared of all commercial and private/civilian aircraft, NORAD (the Air Force) had conducted a previous emergency response exercise 40 years earlier which also completely cleared the skies over the mainland U.S.  This was on October 14, 1961, in a war game called “Sky Shield II,” which was based on a scenario of defending against an air attack by Soviet bombers on New York City.16 The main difference between the 1961 exercise and September 11th is that the clearing of the skies was publicly announced in advance in “Sky Shield.”  This actual Soviet-era exercise (and the fact that it was labeled II implies there was  yet an earlier one), which included 1,800 U.S. and 15 Canadian military planes and was billed as “the greatest exercise ever conducted by Western air defense forces,” is even mentioned in the Air Force’s own account of the events of Sept. 11, Air War Over America.  In fact, Gen. Larry Arnold, NORAD’s commander for the continental U.S. on 9/11 directly under Eberhart,who finally ordered interceptor jets scrambled to belatedly meet the hijack threat, made a point of including the eerily similar 1961 Air Force wargame in the book.  Not only did both the 1961 and September 11 NORAD “Soviet-era” wargame scenarios include attacks on New York City; in the 1961 exercise, U.S. military planes played the role of the Soviet attack bombers.  That is, the U.S.military pre-scripted both the defense and the “attack”by its own planes pretending to be Soviet aircraft.  If Eberhart’s testimony to the 9/11 Commission about NORAD’s conducting a “Soviet-era” attack scenario exercise on 9/11 to the Commission is correct, his own Air Force agency was conducting an exercise much like the one in 1961 on 9/11, for which NORAD therefore pre-scripted the 9/11 “attack” scenario, which was “made real” in the actual attacks that morning.

If a high-level cabal inside the U.S. military and intelligence community intended to make the 9/11 hijack-scenario “exercise(s)” based on Atta’s “Final Planning Meeting” plot become real that morning, they had to have a plan for ensuring the planes actually made it to their targets.  Taking control of the original flight(s) and substituting military planes made to look like them would be the “safest” way to achieve this.  In this light, it is significant that mainstream press stories contain intriguing reports pointing to the possibility that there were two American Airlines “Flight 11s,” leaving from two different gates at Boston Logan airport within a few minutes of one another on 9/11, as well as emerging evidence of other of the OCT-hijacked 9/11 flight numbers being “twinned,”17 or duplicated.  The question thus naturally arises,      were these  “twin” planes U.S. military or CIA planes “playing” hijacked-airliner “attackers,” similar to the 1961 “Sky Shield” scenario except substituting commandeered airliners for Soviet bombers?  And could the planned 9/11 NORAD exercises have included a “trigger” event to clear the skies over the mainland U.S. so that a realistic test of  U.S. air defenses could be conducted without interference from the thousands of civilian aircraft normally in the air?

Key quotes from New York Times articles before, during and immediately after the 1961 NORAD “Sky Shield” exercise are eerily similar to stories appearing on 9/11 [text in parentheses and italics added]:

“It is not so much the fear of collisions with military aircraft that has caused civilian planes to be ordered out of the skies, as it is the knowledge that inadequate [civilian FAA] electronic flight controls will be available during the exercise to    guide them. [U.S.] Strategic Air Command (SAC) bombers, playing the role of the marauding forces, will seek to foul communications and radar.  They will drop tinsel-like pieces of metal called “chaff” overhead [similar to the myriad small pieces of metal scrap found on the Pentagon lawn and at the Shanksville, Pennsylvania “crash” site on 9/11?]…that will throw radarscopes [including the FAA’s] into a confusion of false signals.”  “All the [exercise “Red Team”] bomber missions were laid out ahead of time and fed into the NORAD computer.”   “An automated shorthand running display of the entire battle was provided at NORAD combat center and in similar centers at Strategic Air Command headquarters  [to which President Bush was taken on 9/11] and in the Pentagon [which was attacked on 9/11].”  “A fight plan for every [exercise] aircraft is fed into the computer’s memory beforehand.  When a plane shows on the radarscope, a console operator picks up an aluminum electronic gun, points it at the blip, and squeezes the trigger.  That brings the flight to the computer’s attention.  If the flight [plan] is filed in its memory, the computer automatically replies, ‘Yes, I am aware of  that [plane].’ It does this  by marking the flight with an F for Friendly.  While the computer compares the flight with its memorized data, it marks the flight P for Pending.  Finally, it may mark it H for Hostile. ‘We have two minutes to identify a flight [as Friendly] before we scramble [interceptor jets]…to make a visual identification of an uncertain aircraft or  to attack it.’”  ‘We do not train [in exercises like the 1961 ‘Sky Shield II, or on 9/11] with Hostile symbology [showing on screens]; therefore, the Strategic Air Command’s bombers playing the role of the attacking [Soviet-Russian] force [on October 14, 1961] were marked K, for Faker.’”  “There are seventeen units of Army Air Defense Artillery with ground-to-air anti-aircraft missiles near New York [in 1961; how many more were there on 9/11, 40 years later, when none, according to the official story, were used?]”

The 1961 wargame was directed by then NORAD commander Air Force Gen. Laurence Sherman Kuter from his combat operations center at NORAD’s Colorado Springs headquarters, which in the mid-1960s moved to Cheyenne Mountain, also Gen. Eberhart’s command center on 9/11.  It may also be significant that the Air Force’s war games simulation center is at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama , which Gen. Kuter had earlier commanded and where lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta had received training prior to 9/11.

The Pentagon’s “Able Danger” data miners claim that “Department of Defense lawyers” — almost certainly from the National Security Agency, then headed by Gen. Hayden, an officer in the Air Force, the same service that planned the 9/11 war games — blocked planned meetings with the FBI at which they wanted to tell the FBI that they had “tracked” Atta and other of the 9/11 hijackers prior to 9/11 and ask the FBI to initiate additional surveillance on them.  The fact that the FBI did initiate exactly such a surveillance of the “up to 20 Al Qaeda linked terrorist suspects” before    9/11 (see above) is strong evidence that, despite its claims to the contrary, the Pentagon’s “Able Danger” team, or someone who knew what they had found, did communicate what they had learned from tracking Atta  and the others to the FBI before 9/11, and that the FBI then initiated FISA-warrant-less surveillances of Atta and others subsequently ordered stopped by then Chief FISA Court Judge Lamberth — all prior to 9/11.  The fact that initially-suspected “20th 9/11 hijacker” Moussaoui officially filed claims that he “and my brothers” were surveilled before 9/11 is further evidence that   the FBI continued to watch all or most of the 9/11 hijackers right up until the attacks, despite Lamberth’s order to cease  and desist.  In the days leading up to 9/11, FBI Headquarters supervisors David Frasca and his deputy Michael Maltbie refused 70 urgent requests by Moussaoui’s FBI interrogator for either a FISA Court warrant or an “ordinary” criminal warrant to get into Moussaoui’s computer and surveil anyone mentioned therein.  Doing so, it is claimed, would have stopped the plot, as Moussaoui now claims to have personally known 17 — almost all — of the alleged 19 hijackers.18

In addition to all the evidence that plane-impacts-and-fire was the carefully planned cover story for the cause of collapse     of WTC 1, 2 and 7, as well as the west façade of the Pentagon, both of  which were initially hit by inside-the-buildings explosives, not planes, the other overwhelming line of evidence for 9/11 being an “Inside Job” is the anthrax attacks.  A summary of the anthrax links to 9/11 itself – not just to the known mid-October 2001 letters – follows.  For full details on these links, see Appendix II, The Scarlet A: The Anthrax Links to 9/11.

Any evidence linking 9/11 to the anthrax letters — dated September 11 but sent in mid-October and only to Democratic leaders in Congress, no Republicans — is direct evidence of an inside job because that particular type of anthrax is known to have been of the highly controlled “Ames strain” developed by the U.S. Army at Ft. Detrick, Maryland, and at the University of Iowa in Ames, Iowa.  It was also  high-spore-count, super military-grade weaponized anthrax refined according to a trade secret reportedly personally held by William Patrick, former Ft. Detrick bio-weapons expert and mentor of Steven Hatfill, the only “person of interest” stalked by the FBI as a suspect in the still “unsolved” anthrax case, and the close friend and colleague of Bush Administration bio-counterterrorism expert Jerry Hauer, a signer of the pre-9/11 Project for New American Century (PNAC) manifesto noting the “opportunities” that would be created by “a new Pearl Harbor” attack.

On September 11, 2001 this same Jerry Hauer reportedly personally delivered the anti-anthrax medication Cipro to Vice President Cheney’s staff at the White House.  Why?  The conservative legal watchdog group Judicial Watch has filed a suit against Vice President Cheney and other Bush Admin. officials demanding to know why Cipro was delivered to the executive mansion — and only to the   executive mansion — on the day of the attacks.  So far the response has been deafening silence.  On September 10th, the day before 9/11, FEMA and other emergency response personnel arrived in    New York City for a counter-bioterrorism exercise called “Tripod II” claimed by the Bush administration to have been scheduled to begin September 12.  There is reason to believe that the bio-agent this drill was to practice defending against was anthrax, as Jerry Hauer was also a major planner of the New York City exercise.  And there is also a strong possibility the true start date for the exercise was Sept. 11, not Sept. 12, as many “exercise” personnel were already in place in New York City on September 10.  As NORAD’s (U.S. Air Force’s) hijack-scenario ‘counterterrorism’ exercise had just “come to life” in real attacks on 9/11, were Hauer and Cheney worried that the same thing might be about to happen with the counter-bioterrorism “exercise” Tripod II?  Is this why the anti-anthrax drug Cipro was distributed to the White House on 9/11 — “just in case”?   If so, it would be strong evidence that Tripod II was on the scenario of defending New York    City — and perhaps also the White House — against an anthrax attack.  Was the “vector” — the delivery vehicle — for that anthrax-attack-scenario emergency response exercise to have been via hijacked plane(s)?

Notably, in their book on bio-terrorism, Germs, Judith Miller and William Broad claim, apparently from inside sources, that Ramzi Yousef’s plans for the first World Trade Center attack  in 1993 included explosively pushing large quantities of cyanide out into New York City.  Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the official story “mastermind” of 9/11, is Yousef’s uncle.  Finally, former New York City mayor Rudolf Giuliani testified to the 9/11 Commission that even before WTC7, the location of his emergency operations center, collapsed on 9/11, he moved those operations to the command and control center set up for the “Tripod II” bio-terrorism exercise on Pier 92 and that it worked even better      than the original.  Giuliani told the 9/11 Commission, “The reason Pier 92 was selected as a command center was because   on the next day, on September 12, Pier 92 was going to have a drill. It had hundreds of people there — from FEMA, from    the Federal Government, from [the] State [Dept.], from the [ New York ] State Emergency Management Office – and they were getting ready for a drill for bio-chemical attack.  So that was going be the place they were going  to have the drill.  The equipment was already there, so we were able to establish a command center  there that was two and a half to three times bigger than the command center that we had lost at 7 World Trade Center.  And it was from there that the rest of the [9/11 and subsequent] search and rescue effort was completed.”

Conclusion

A cabal of covert elements of the U.S. military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, had the classification-controlled access to plant the explosives that went off inside its own most heavily defended world headquarters, the Pentagon, on 9/11.  The U.S. military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, had the access to plant the explosives   Willy Rodriguez heard and felt go off deep in the sub-basement of the World Trade Center on 9/11.  The U.S. military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to plant the controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1, WTC2 and WTC7 in New York City which brought down all three buildings on 9/11, and had offices in WTC 7.  The U.S. military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, had access to the sulfur-enhanced super-military-grade nano-thermite  (thermate) detected in the WTC dust needed to melt the steel found molten deep in its basement levels as long as two months later, and to the super-military-grade nano anthrax spores in the letters sent to the Democratic leadership of the Congress and to top media.  It is absurd to believe that al Qaeda would target only Democrats, especially as the U.S. leadership at the time of the attacks was Republican. When he    received the anthrax letter dated September 11, then Senate Democratic leader Thomas Daschle was calling for a Congressional investigation of 9/11 and had already been warned off from “looking too closely at” 9/11 by personal calls from both President Bush and Vice President Cheney.  When he received his anthrax letter, another Democratic leader, Senator Patrick Leahy, was leading the Congressional resistance to the Patriot Act, a premeditated assault on Americans’ privacy rights and civil liberties justified by “al Qaeda’s” claimed 9/11 attack clearly drafted by the Bush Administration well before 9/11 and “in the can” awaiting its desired “New Pearl Harbor” trigger event.  The U.S. military and intelligence community, not al Qaeda, would have chosen the least-populated and mostreinforced section of the Pentagon––its newly upgraded west wedge—to strike in order to minimize casualties while being able to blame outside attackers, whereas real terrorists would have tried to maximize them.  Real terrorists, also, would have maximized casualties at the World Trade Center by placing explosives so as to allow the buildings to haphazardly fall on other buildings and the streets around them, not bring them neatly down by controlled demolition designed to minimize casualties and surrounding physical damage.  A U.S. military plane, not one piloted by al Qaeda, had to have performed the steep, highly skilled, high-speed 270- to 330-degree dive towards the Pentagon that Dulles Air Traffic Controllers were sure was a military plane as they watched it on their screens that morning.  Only a military aircraft, not a civilian airliner flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the “Friendly” signal needed not to trigger the Pentagon’s anti-aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building.  Only the U.S. military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break its own Standard Operating Procedures and paralyze its own emergency response system on 9/11.

And who in the U.S. military, intelligence and military contractor chains of command and U.S. civilian leadership   in the Bush-Cheney Administration are among the prime suspects for these Acts of High Treason?

First and foremost are the signers of the pre-9/11 Project for a New American Century (PNAC) manifesto         calling for “a new Pearl Harbor” to catalyze its radical right-wing global domination and domestic surveillance-and-control agenda:  1) Vice President Dick Cheney; 2) Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld; then Deputy Secretary of Defense     Paul Wolfowitz; 3) Richard Perle, then head of Secretary Rumsfeld’s Defense Policy Board; 4) Jerry Hauer, one of the government’s top bio-terrorism experts who reportedly took anti-anthrax Cipro to the White House on 9/11.15A Hauer had been director of NYC Mayor Rudolph Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM), whose personnel were moved to a New York pier on 9/11 just before its WTC7 offices were destroyed by pre-placed controlled demolition charges.  A central player in scripting the bio-chem terrorism attack scenario for the Sept. 10/11/12 TRIPOD II exercise in NYC, Hauer is also an expert in the response to building collapses (New York Times, July 27, 1999).  It was Hauer who insisted, despite the 1993 terrorist attack on WTC1, that Giuliani still locate his Office of Emergency Management, from which a response to another terrorist attack would be expected  to be orchestrated, in WTC7 next door15B, and also Hauer who zealously pushed the ‘bin Laden did it and planes-and-fires brought down the Towers’ official story on CBS News  on 9/11 in the immediate aftermath of the attacks before anyone without insider knowledge could have possibly determined the actual cause of the collapses, taking pains to state that explosives were not involved, when they were.  The OEM opened on the 23rd floor of WTC7 in June 1999, where Hauer, its director, had his office.  Hauer was also managing director of Kroll Associates before and on 9/11, the company that provided ‘security’ for the World Trade Center, including all three buildings brought down by controlled demolition that morning, and thus had complete access to pre-place the explosive charges he adamantly insisted on national TV on 9/11 were not involved.  Hauer became    a National Security adviser to the National Institutes of Health on Sept. 10, the very day TRIPOD II personnel arrived in New York City , from which new NIH post he managed the Bush Administration’s ‘response’ to the imminent anthrax attacks and the initial cover up of the insider anthrax killers.  5) Gary Bauer, the right-wing ‘family values’ zealot who ‘happened’ to be one of the ‘witnesses’ to immediately claim publicly to have seen ‘Flight 77 hit the Pentagon’, proven by the evidence to be a physical impossibility; and 6) then National Security Council Middle East adviser Zalmay Khalizad, soon to be the first US Ambassador to Afghanistan after 9/11 and then U.S. Ambassador to Iraq – the very two countries whose invasions were rationalized as retaliation for the 9/11 attacks.  During the Cold War, Khalizad was reportedly a liaison to then CIA “bag man” Osama bin Laden in the CIA-Pakistani ISI-Saudi covert war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, the crucible from which al Qaeda later emerged.  ‘Al Qaeda’, in fact, was originally the CIA’s and ISI’s                    list of anti-Soviet foreign fighters in Afghanistan.

Another key suspect is Air Force General William Hayden, later Director of the CIA and then head of the     National Security Agency (NSA), which tapped the calls of lead hijacker Mohamed Atta and 9/11 “mastermind” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed the day before 9/11, and surely on many other occasions before 9/11 as well—all almost certainly without FISA warrants as required by law.  These pre-9/11 warrant-less NSA taps put the lie to President Bush’s claim that he initiated the program of warrant-less NSA taps of al Qaeda suspects because of—and thus only after—9/11.  Yet another key suspect is Army Lieutenant General William “Jerry” Boykin, the radical Christian fundamentalist Special Operations commando recently proposed to head the Army’s Special Operations Command.  Yet another is the Pentagon’s POP2 office, which reportedly plans and scripts “false flag” operations—attacks planned and orchestrated by the U.S. military but made to appear perpetrated  by an outside enemy to justify U.S. military “retaliation.”  Yet another suspect is Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Iran expert Lawrence “Larry” Franklin, who was “loaned” to Perle and Wolfowitz’s neocon co-conspirator Douglas Feith and arrested for passing national security secrets to Israeli operatives at a meeting of top American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) personnel.  Franklin also was and is an officer in the Air Force Reserves, which directed NORAD’s “Vigilant Guardian/Vigilant Warrior” hijack-scenario exercises on 9/11.

Scrutiny should also be leveled at the scriptwriters for the NORAD hijack-scenario  and NRO plane-into-tower emergency response exercises planned for and held on 9/11, especially members of their lead “White Teams,”which set the content and then oversee both “Red Team attackers” and  “Blue Team defenders” on the actual day of an exercise, in this case on 9/11 itself.  And every one of  the as-yet-to-be-identified “top Pentagon officials” who on Sept. 10, the day before 9/11, according to Newsweek, suddenly cancelled their already-booked flights for September 11.19 Also National Military Command Center (NMCC) commander Brig. Gen. Montague Winfield, who on that same day, September 10, asked his deputy, Navy Capt. Charles Leidig to take over for him the next morning  between 8:30 and 10:30 — precisely the time window of the “exercises” whose details and date had been given to Mohammed Atta.  Further investigation should be directed at the (government) “agency” the 9/11 Commission revealed, without identifying    it by name, that took out the vast majority of the put options on American Airlines, United Airlines, Boeing and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter in the few days before 9/11.  Also, Michael Chertoff, U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey during the first 1993 attack on the World Trade Center who, as a private attorney, represented Egyptian-born US resident Magdy Elamir, under investigation for illegally diverting millions of dollars and whose brother, Mohammed Elamir, funded arms smugglers linked to al Qaeda.20 Significantly, Mohamed Atta’s name in his country of birth, Egypt, was also Mohamed Elamir. In other words, the very man President Bush put in charge of the entire 9/11 “investigation” and who is now Director of Homeland Security — the top official charged with defending the U.S. mainland from an attack by al Qaeda — may have himself  been directly involved with Al Qaeda and even with Mohamed Atta himself.  In fact, Chertoff   may well have been the top Bush-Cheney insider whom we know (see above) had to have been the source for Atta’s finally being told the date of “his own” attack.  And FBI headquarters supervisor David Frasca and his deputy Michael Maltbie, who ignored 70 pleas by Zacarias Moussaoui’s FBI interrogator to let him investigate the contents of Moussaoui’s computer before 9/11.  Attention  should especially be directed to Phillip Zelikow, a Bush-Cheney White House NSC staff member along with Zalmay Khalizad to then NSC Adviser Condoleezza Rice before and on 9/11.  Zelikow both orchestrated The 9/11 Commission Report cover up of the administration’s inside job and, at Rice’s personal request, rewrote the Bush Administration’s official national strategic plan draft to better match the global domination agenda of the pre-9/11 PNAC manifesto.  Zelikow specializes in political mythologies, clearly the most important qualification for his selection as executive director of the Official Myth of Sept. 11 — The 9/11 Commission ReportOnly someone in the innermost circle  of the actual criminal conspirators would be trusted with this critical mission covering up their  mass crime.  These are just some of the names knit into the Scroll of the September 11 Truth Revolution.

Notes:

1) The clock stopped at the moment the Great Earthquake hit San Francisco on April 18, 1906 is at http://sfgate.com/greatquake/ .

2) The clock at the Pentagon heliport just outside the west section, frozen at 9:31:40 am by the violent event at the Pentagon, was posted on an official Navy web site at: http://www.news.navy.mil/view_single.asp?id=2480Pentagonclock_BBC.  Note that whoever took this official Navy photo placed the clock in front of a poster of the controversial Marine Corps part-helicopter/part-fixed-wing plane the Osprey, perhaps thereby suggesting what may have struck the building (after the inside explosions went off), if anything did.  Though the Osprey officially existed  only in prototype at the time, a prototype Osprey would be unique in that its     military IFF transponder would have given off a ‘friendly’ signal and it could have approached the Pentagon helipad in its   helicopter mode and changed over into fixed-wing plane mode at the last second, taking defenses off guard.  Yet another stopped Pentagon clock is — or  was — in the September 11 exhibit at the Smithsonian Institution, originally posted at http://www.americanhistory.si.edu/september11/collection/record.asp?ID=19 .  The author was informed that, after this white paper was published on the Internet, the clock was removed from the Smithsonian 9/11 exhibit but is still in storage there.

2A) Videotaped under-oath testimony of April Gallop to the author, Irvine, California, March 2007, approx. two hours.

2B) April Gallop’s watch, which was stopped just after 9:30 by the explosion that happened at the precise moment she hit the ‘power on’ button on her computer on the morning of 9/11, is evidence that the actual time of the initial explosive violent at the Pentagon was closer to 9:30 than 9:32.  As the information about Gallop’s wrist watch was obtained after the first version of this white paper was published, the author has retained 9:32 as a shorthand for the time window 9:30 to 9:32 within which, from the subsequent additional evidence, the initial explosion at the Pentagon occurred.

2C) Audio of Jane Graham interview, KPFA Radio, Berkeley, Calif. http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/62892

3) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) timeline document “Executive Summary Chronology of a Multiple Hijacking Crisis, September 11, 2001.”

4) Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Moller interview with Denmark Radio P3, September 12, 2001, 6:15 am Denmark time.  “…I saw smoke and fire rising from the Pentagon at 9:32…My first impression was that a bomb had been detonated at the Pentagon.”  The audio of this radio interview is in the 9/11   video documentary “Bomberne som Forsvandt” by Danish researcher Henrik Melvang, available at www.unmask.dk and at www.bombsinsidewtc.dk.  See also the 9/11 timeline by European researcher Jose Garcia in Reality, Truth and Evil Facts, Questions and Perspectives on September 11, 2001, Temple Lodge Publications, 2005.

4A) Naudet Brothers video:  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2457244225269763926&hl=en# at 42:27.

4B) Clarke interview article at  http://www.nps.edu/About/News/Counterterrorism-Czar-Richard-Clarke-Calls-for-New-National-Cyber-Defense-Policy-to-Prevent-a-Cyber-9/11-.html

4C) Touching History: The Untold Story of the Drama That Unfolded in the Skies Over America on 9/11, pp. 24-27.

5) The 9/11 Conspiracy, Catfeet Press/Open Court , James Fetzer, editor, 2006, chapter by Prof. James Fetzer; and photos   of a JT8D turbojet engine and the remnant found at the Pentagon at http://www.simmeringfrogs.com/articles/jt8d.html.

6) Report by two civilian defense contractor employees at “Secret Global Hawk Refit for Sky Warrior,” http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/05/318250.shtml.

6A) Rear Admiral Hathaway bio information     (http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=complete_911_timeline_3229#complete_911_timeline_3229).

7) 9/11 — Coup Against America : The Pentagon Analysis, compilation of Pentagon eyewitness reports, photos and analyses with hundreds of references, by Pete Tiradera, 2006, available from petertiradera@yahoo.com.     

8) Perkal and Goldsmith:  http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/explosive.html.  Danner:  American  Free Press, July 7, 2006, reporting based on audio report by Republic Broadcasting Network, summary at http://www.total911.info/2006/07/pentagon-eyewitness-ids-global-hawk.html.

9) Author interview with former Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and  Low Intensity Conflict, Monterey, California; summary posted on Naval Postgraduate School web site www.nps.navy.mil, subsequently changed to www.nps.edu.  Article no longer posted; hard copy available from the author.

9A) Personal communication to the author by Rhett Flater, Executive Director of the American Helicopter Society.

9B) “Chilling Aerial Photos of 9/11 Attack Released: Police Aerial Photos Show World Trade Center Collapse” http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=9796098.

10) Videotaped testimony of William (“Willy”) Rodriguez, former World Trade Center janitor and the last person to leave the WTC alive on September 11, in the 9/11 documentary “Loose Change,” second edition”, text in parentheses added:  “All of a sudden we hear ‘Boom!’ in the basement.  I thought it was a generator that blew up, and I said to myself, ‘Oh, my God, I think it was a generator.  And I was going to verbalize it, and when I finished saying that in my mind I heard (another, second) ‘Boom!’ right on the top (above), pretty far away.  And so it was a difference (in space and time) between coming from the basement and coming from the top…and a person comes running into the office (in the first basement level, from a deeper basement level) saying ‘Explosion!’…and he said ‘(it was from) The elevators!’  And there were many (deep basement WTC1) explosions.”

11) “Agency (NRO) Planned Exercise on September 11 Built Around a Plane Crashing into a Building,” Associated Press, August 22, 2002; by Jonathan Lumpkin; “They Scrambled Jets, but It was a Race They Couldn’t Win,” Syracuse Post-Standard, January 20, 2002, by Hart Seely; “Rome Staff’s Efforts on 9/11 Earn Praise, Commission Says Military Did the Best It Could with the Information It Had,” Syracuse Post-Standard, June 18, 2004, by Hart Seely; Complete 9/11 Military Exercises Timeline, Cooperative Research, at http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline&before-9/11=militaryExercises;

Crossing the Rubicon, by Michael Ruppert, Chapter 19: “Wargames and High Tech: Paralyzing the System to Pull Off the Attacks” and Chapter 20: “Q&A: Many Asked, Some Answered––and a Golden Moment,” New Society Publishers, 2004.  In the Acknowledgements to Rubicon, p. xi, Ruppert credits the author with what he refers to as “the Holy Grail of 9/11 research” (p. 336): Thanks to Barbara Honegger, who kept hammering on the wargames until we all paid notice…  you showed me the most important lead I needed to put it all together.”

12) “Detainee’s Suit Gains Support from Jet’s Log,” New York Times, March 30, 2005, p. A1. Key excerpt, text in parentheses added: “Mr. Arar (a “rendered” detainee) says he followed the (Gulfstream jet) plane’s movements on a map displayed on a video screen (inside the plane), watching it as he traveled to Dulles Airport outside Washington, to a Maine Airport he believed was in Portland (Maine), to Rome, and finally to Amman, Jordan, where he was blindfolded and driven to Syria.” Though the FAA claims its records show a plane on that date making the other stops but landing in Bangor, not Portland , Maine, the detainee’s account may be accurate, as only Portland ’s airport is labeled an  “International Jet Port ,” specializing in landings and takeoffs of just such private, corporate and government jets.    

13) Ironically, at the final hearing of the Kean Commission, where its report was released to the press and public, commissioner John Lehman responded to the question, What if anything remained unknown, by noting that the Commission still wasn’t clear as to “how Atta chose the date for the attacks.”

14) Summary interrogation of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, claimed “mastermind” of the September 11 attack plot, read into the Zacarias Moussaoui sentencing trial record by the prosecution on March 27, 2006; the full text is part of the court proceedings transcript for that date available through Exemplaris.com.

15) The 9/11 Commission Report, note 116, p. 458, at http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf.  Key excerpt:  “On 9/11, NORAD was scheduled to conduct a military exercise, Vigilant Guardian, which postulated a bomber attack from the former Soviet Union .”

15A) http://www.judicialwatch.org/1967.shtml

15B) http://truthmovecom.blogspot.com/2008/07/jerome-hauer-911-suspect-awaiting.html

READ FULL STORY HERE

Share

Comments are closed.

Listen Live with Player Below

Archives

November 2017
S M T W T F S
« Oct    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

User Login