Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A History of 9/11- whats most relevant and what is missing?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-05 10:43 PM
Original message
A History of 9/11- whats most relevant and what is missing?
Edited on Thu Jun-09-05 11:27 PM by philb
History of 9/11
1. Operation Northwoods, a plot by U.S. intelligence/military for a terrorist plot carried out in the U.S. to be blamed on Cuba as pretext to overthrow Castro, was updated when George Bush as CIA Director to take out the WTC buildings using airplanes and blame the event on Arabs.
2. 1995- A plan by al-Qaeda operatives(including Khalid Shaikh Mahammed and Ramsi Yousef) involved in the 1993 attack on the WTC buildings was discovered on computer disks, involving using commercial airplanes in terrorist attacks and including plans to attack the WTC buildings and the Pentagon, was discovered by U.S. and Philippine intelligence agents resulting in conviction and jailing of Yousef and others. Its code name was Project Bojinka and the plan and 9/11 was carried out exactly 5 years after Yousef was convicted on Sept 11, 1996, at such time Yousef again discussed plans for carrying out Project Bojinka.
3. 1997- Book by former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski (The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Geostrategic Imperatives) portrays control of the Eurasian land mass and its oil assets as the key to world power.
4. late 1990s- PNAC, a group of elites many of which are in the Bush administration, draft a document: "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces, and Resources for a New Century" - with a plan to gain control of Iraq and mid-Asia oil assets and militarize space to insure dominance of U.S. interests and investments. Followed later by “Vision for 2020”-
5. late 1990s up to 9/11- members of PNAC discuss the need for a new Pearl Harbor event to convince the U.S. public to greatly increase military spending to carry out the expensive initiatives proposed in Vision for 2020.
6. late 1990s- A consortium of companies and interests(CentGas) dominated by U.S. and Saudi Arabia(Unocal, Delta Gas,etc.) make plans for a major Central Asia Gas Pipeline through Afghanistan and Pakistan to get market the vast mid-Asia oil reserves.
7. The dominant military leader and most popular leader in Afghanistan(Masood) opposes the plans of CentGas and sides with another alternative consortium led by South American interests.
8. U.S. which had backed Islamic militants active in Afghanistan and Chesnea fighting against Russia with huge amounts of money and supplies through the Pakistani ISI supports Taliban as an alternative to Masood in Afghanistan that might side with U.S. plans for the CAGP.
9. 2000- U.S. negotiators warn Taliban that if they don’t support the U.S. plans for the CAGP that a U.S. supported attack on Afghanistan is likely by Sept 2001.
10. Taliban offer to give up bin Laden group for extradition in return for more economic benefits to Taliban from the CAGP.
11. A plan that appears to have been devised jointly by al-Qaeda and CIA and Pakistani ISI is carried out assassinating Masood on 9/9/2001.
12. year leading up to 9/11- The U.S. administration and intelligence services are deluged with specific warnings of imminent attacks using airplanes on significant U.S. targets from captured al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives, foreign intelligence agencies, and FBI agents. (www.flcv.com/warnings.html)
13. week prior to 9/11- the leader of the Pakistani ISI(Gen. Ahmad) who was the paymaster of some of the money that supported al-Qaeda operatives such as Mohamed Atta was in the U.S.. His stay included meetings with U.S. intelligence and political officials.
14. 9/11 - Military/Intelligence war games initiated including plans for attacking WTC and Pentagon buildings using commercial airliners. Some have suggested that commercial airline flights were part of the games, and some of the 9/11 flights may have been a part of the games.
15. 7:59 to 10:06 am, 9/11 attacks on WTC buildings, Pentagon, and Fl 93 crashes in Pennsylvania. Inexplicably, though the FAA and officials are aware of “hijackings” and course changes, and all commercial flights are ordered down at 9:20, the public is told none of the planes were intercepted by the U.S. military.
16. soon after 9/11, Administration announces that the attack was carried out by 19 al-Qaeda operatives who hijacked and flew the planes. Evidence of who they were appeared through miraculous circumstances, though later it appears that several of those who were named as being hijackers are still alive and claim that their names should be taken off the list of hijackers. Some suggest there is much evidence that the other “hijackers” who died that day including Atta appeared to have U.S. intelligence or military support during their stay in the U.S. regarding passports and flight training.
17. Some suggest that the “hijackers” appear to have had help and may have thought they were involved in an operation different than what actually occurred- perhaps even thought they were part of the war games. Also that some of the supposed pilots did not have sufficient training and skills to carry out the events of that day as they occurred.
18. 2004- Testimony of officials and military leaders involved in the 9/11 events and other evidence in the 9/11 Commission Hearings strongly supports complicity by Pentagon and/or military officials; but the 9/11 Commission Report publishes a new timeline and explanation of events that attempts to absolve official complicity- but ignores and conflicts with the majority of credible testimony and evidence.

More details, documentation, references:
http://www.flcv.com/offcompl.html
http://www.flcv.com/anomalie.html
Dr. D.R. Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Admin and 9/11, 2004
Dr. D.R. Griffin, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions,
Etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-05 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
1. This is decent, one probable error and a question:
Edited on Thu Jun-09-05 10:57 PM by JackRiddler
"4. late 1990s- PNAC, a group of elites many of which are in the Bush administration, draft “Vision for 2020”- with a plan to gain control of Iraq and mid-Asia oil assets and militarize space to insure dominance of U.S. interests and investments."

Vision for 2020 is probably not PNAC, but the U.S. Air Force document downloadable here:
http://summeroftruth.org/images/E-S.pdf
Describes chipped humans, total full-spectrum dominance, all kinds of sci fi concepts...

You are probably thinking of "Rebuilding America's Defenses," the central manifesto of PNAC, which contains the infamous "new Pearl Harbor" quote:
http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

Now, what is your source for the idea that Massoud had lined up with the Argentinean consortium around Bridas? (Pt. 9) VERY INTERESTING!

"7. The dominant military leader and most popular leader in Afghanistan(Masood) opposes the plans of CentGas and sides with another alternative consortium led by South American interests."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-09-05 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. You are correct about the PNAC document title- the one I had mentioned
Edited on Thu Jun-09-05 11:30 PM by philb
may have been a follow up.
The PNAC document has been much publicized and discussed.

I did this list mostly off the top of my head, but the likely source of the Masood/Argentine consortium connection was likely one of Dr. Griffin's books- which I've recently read. It could also have come from one of the main references that Griffin quoted, the British book on 9/11, Canadian Chossudusky, or Paul Thompson.
.



As the dominant leader and person with the most popular support in the northern alliance, Masood was the most likely to become leader of Afghanistan after the U.S. ousted the Taliban.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dancing_Dave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 01:12 AM
Response to Original message
3. I think what was going on in the sky on 9/11/2001 is the biggest mystery.
What all aircraft were really involved and where did they all really go?

I don't know. Obviously, there's big problems with the official version, but WHAT did happen...well, I hope some new evidence about this comes out soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Christophera Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 01:15 AM
Response to Original message
4. Relevance Of Info To Our Conditions Is Most Primary Determination
Edited on Fri Jun-10-05 01:17 AM by Christophera
philb,

Great thread. Relevance is the most important aspect at this time. The greatest information that cannot be applied is useless until conditions change.

Only information that we, the people can use without relying on an accountable government, has value for 9-11 truthseekers. Information that can be used to dramamtically increase our numbers is the only information of tangible value at this time.

Later, yes. It will all have great value. If we don't get past these conditions it is all useless.

History of 9/11
1. Operation Northwoods: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
2. 1995- A plan by al-Qaeda operatives: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
3. 1997- Book by former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
4. late 1990s- PNAC, a group of elites; Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
5. late 1990s up to 9/11- members: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
6. late 1990s- A consortium of companies and interests:
Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
7. The dominant military leader and most popular leader in Afghanistan: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
8. U.S. which had backed Islamic militants active in Afghanistan : Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
9. 2000- U.S. negotiators warn Taliban: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
10. Taliban offer to give up bin Laden group: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
12. year leading up to 9/11- The U.S. administration: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
13. week prior to 9/11- the leader of the Pakistani: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
14. 9/11 - Military/Intelligence war games initiated: Possible use in creating unity amongst citizens.
15. 7:59 to 10:06 am, 9/11 attacks on WTC buildings: Demolition of WTC building is MIHOP and can be proven. Other related MIHOPs' are proven

16. soon after 9/11, Administration: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
17. Some suggest that the “hijackers” appear to have had help: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
18. 2004- Testimony of officials and military leaders involved: Not useful at this time, requires accountable government
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Are you talking about relevance to Congress or impeachment only?
I think educating the public and media people(even though there is blackout) is the most important factor, and some of these can be of relevance if a solid case can be made for others and a connection shown.

But I don't understand the degree of denial or unwillingness of the Dems, progressives, or individual media people given the huge numbers out there. Given that there seems to be a clear and obvious case for complicity and cover-up supported by 9/11 Comm. testimony and other credible evidence.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Christophera Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 03:47 PM
Response to Original message
5. What Is Missing Most Is 9-11 Truth Seekers That Can Focus
on relevance under the present conditions. Observe the following thread titles.


UA 93: How much of the wreckage was recovered?

MSNBC: German TV show puts Bush behind 9/11 attacks - (VIDEO)

German TV Show Depicts 9/11 As Bush Plot.

"Report: CIA official blocked Sept. 11 memo"

Theologian 911 Truth Advocate David Ray Griffin's Hustler Interveiw online

David Ray Griffin evidence Bush admin complicit in 9/11 - update & links

Silverstein's "Pull it"

Reply to Sciam's attempted debunking of 9/11 skeptics

"Pentagon Strike" video ...new and well done

New article on Mary Schneider

Isn't it obvious these statements by officials are intentional "lies"

Moving report from Ground Zero worker at Let's Roll


Flight 93 depends on government accountability as well as CIA actions, also official lies unless they are proven as complicit, most of what Griffen has to say, and silverstiens statements. Mary Schneider could be a mind controlled plant. The pentagon is a total red herring because of the mind controlled government witnesses. Moving reports by clean up workers at ground zero are nice but won't help us at all. Scientific American has been used to confuse the issues, why give them attention? How can what Germans think help us and bush is a puppet.

See what I mean. We need to focus on solid evidence of complicity that we can use to counter the denial inspired by FLAG ABUSE after 9-11!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
6. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I wasn't aware of the Genesis connection? Are you suggesting some of the
items may not be factual?
or not connected to 9/11?
educate me on which fall into these categories and why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
9. Does anyone know of problems with some of the 18 items listed?
I could have added a lot more and there are a lot of details available on each.

But there is enough documentation without including questionable items that might only distract.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ROH Donating Member (521 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-10-05 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
10. Do you have a reference link, please?
You wrote: "... was updated when George Bush as CIA Director to take out the WTC buildings using airplanes and blame the event on Arabs."

The Cuba basis for Operation Northwoods is well-documented, but do you have a reference link, please, to illustrate this updating to "the WTC buildings using airplanes and blame the event on Arabs."?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 06:25 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Updated Operation Northwoods Plan for WTC
Updated Operation Northwoods Plan for WTC

Source is Timothy McNiven, a Defense Dept. operative who was one of the authors of the plan,
McNiven has passed a lie detector test regarding this story

This information is on a large number of web sites such as

http://suetheterrorists.net/
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/05/318050.shtml
www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2005/200305terroristplan.htm
http://www.rense.com/general63/TWIN.HTM

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ROH Donating Member (521 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Thank you
There is an interesting comment mentioned at some of those websites:
"Comment: If completely confirmed 100% then this is THE smoking gun, over and above Northwoods, the NORAD stand down, the explosives in the buildings, any other piece of 9/11 evidence. It's going to be interesting to see how they pass this one off as a 'coincidence' - we need to get this on newswires immediately. This is the straw that could break the camel's back."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. Sorry, McNivens a probable dud...
You should look at his actual site and deposition at

http://www.codenamegrillfire.com/docs/affidavit.pdf

to see the internal contradictions... or read on:

First of all, I am not at all averse to the idea that the US government may have hatched and rehearsed the 9/11 scenario as far back as the mid-1970s. This seems quite plausible to me.

Unfortunately, that does not yet mean that McNiven's story is true. In fact, I approach it with greater caution for the very fact that it is very much something that I would like to see confirmed.

So far McNiven's story fails the smell test, and I'll tell you why.

The 8-page deposition by McNiven, dated Nov 10, 2003, is available at his site in the form of a scanned PDF file:

http://www.codenamegrillfire.com/docs/affidavit.pdf

I'm most interested to see if any of the other participants he mentions will come forward.

His claim that he was given explicit orders to expose the story to the public if a 9/11-style event ever happened disturbs my olfactory sense. Why just him?

(Also disturbing is the Capitalization of Every Other Word and the Curious Incompleteness of the Narrative.)

But one question really sticks out: If the exercise was held in 1976, how is it that he says that at the time, he brought up Clinton as a possible future president?!

McNiven recalls the participants being asked to come up with a suitable political situation for the attack. The answer given is "hamstringing": the outgoing presidential party has set up the new president of the incoming party with a booby trap (the attack).

Who might play such a role as president, the participants are then asked.

At this point, McNivens relates doing an impersonation of Bill Clinton shaking President Kennedy's hand as a boy, "like in that picture that ran in the newspapers..."

Did any such pic run in the papers in the mid-70s? If so, why should it be memorable to McNivens? Is McNivens recalling the pic from the early 60's? W

hy is he coming up with Clinton in the 70's, when Clinton was not yet even governor? Is this some bizarre mental mix-up? Is McNiven confused, or mind-controlled?

Are we meant to think that Clinton had already been designated for the presidency at that early date? If so, how would innocent young McNiven have guessed?

Miming the handshake would not be anything his other participants would recognize as a trademark gesture that would make them think of Clinton in 1976...

---

Large part of the McN coverage has been by the omnipresent Greg Szymanski, he who eats up others' stories and spits them out with an AFP spin...

Szymanski covered the McNivens story without mentioning this bizarre and telling detail. Now the same author has got a new story that on its face seems far less plausible than McNiven's: of someone claiming to have invented a kind of future-telling device and being visited by a row of black cars from which Osama's brothers emerge to warn of the future 9/11 attack. In 1987. Only source is a man speaking on a park bench in Philadelphia.

Again, this could still be true. But it ain't of any journalistic use, not without any other source or documentary backing for at least some of the details. And the hokeyness of Szymanski's invocations of the founding fathers etc. seems to be a sorry attempt to hide how thin the story actually is.

Again, I know from the black-box example that Szymanski gets facts wrong. He's published in AFP, along with the similarly suspect Christopher Bollyn.

Let the reader beware...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
13. NORAD drills prior to 9/11 of hijacked planes running into buildings
documented extensively in "Crossing the Rubicon".

Also, Pentagon practiced plane into building drills.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ROH Donating Member (521 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Yes, here are two airliner crash drills at the Pentagon prior to 9/11:
--------------------
Pentagon and Arlington, Va., emergency responders rehearsed how they would respond if a plane crashed into the Pentagon in October 2000, less than a year before the Sept. 11 terrorist attack.

...

The Oct. 24-26, 2000 Pentagon Mass Casualty Exercise, part of an annual emergency response rehearsal, envisioned a commercial airliner crashing into the Pentagon, killing 341 victims.

--------------------
http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20040422-090447-8354r.htm


--------------------
Dr. Carlton told U.S. MEDICINE that his team had run an exercise in May with a scenario in which a 757 crashes into the Pentagon. "We had worked out what would happen (and) what was needed," he said."
--------------------
http://www.usmedicine.com/article.cfm?articleID=270&issueID=31

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #14
18. If you worked under the landing pattern of a major airport..
wouldn't you be concerned about an airliner accidentally crashing into you. Think for a second - if you were planning a worst case disaster drill for the Pentagon, what other scenario short of a nuclear explosion would you pick? Especially if you wanted to exercise coordination with other emergency services?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
philb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Extremely implausible an airliner hitting Pentagon other than hijacking
or leased airplane for the purpose of hitting Pentagon.
Not even 1 in 1 million chances otherwise. Nothing of this nature has ever come close to happening.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. But it would be a worst case scenario, wouldn't it?
Again - what scenario would you suggest for a mass casualty disaster drill for a huge building next to an airport? The issue is not how likely it would be, but rather what would cause the most damage. If you have ever been involved in disaster drills, the well designed ones stretch the boundaries to stress the system and see where the weaknesses are. The point is that there is a reasonable reason for such a drill at the Pentagon - your insistence on see conspiracy in every thing is blinding you to this fact. This was a multi-agency, multi-jurisdiction drill. It had to have involved hundreds of people and months of planning.

Why would the government tip their hand if they planned to hit the Pentagon with a plane?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Don't forget the NRO exercise ON THE DAY!!!
"On 9/11, CIA Was Running Simulation of a Plane Crashing into a Building"

http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/cia-simulation.htm

>>> Here's another admission which destroys the government's lie that it couldn't possibly have foreseen the use of planes to ram buildings.

The National Law Enforcement and Security Institute will be holding a conference called "Homeland Security: America's Leadership Challenge" in Chicago on 6 Sept 2002. The star speaker is Rudolph Giuliani. One of the other speakers is CIA man John Fulton. Here is the crucial sentence from the promotional literature for the conference:

On the morning of September 11th 2001, Mr. Fulton and his team at the CIA were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-11-05 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
15. Cheney's secret energy meetings.
If there's any tie-in between 9/11 and Iraq, I think we will find it there...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 12:11 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC