Archive for the ‘9/11 News’ Category


9/11 Commission Counsel: Government Agreed to Lie About 9/11

Paul Joseph Watson
Tuesday, April 14, 2009

9/11 Commission Counsel: Government Agreed to Lie About 9/11 140409top

The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission – John Farmer – says that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11, echoing the assertions of fellow 9/11 Commission members who concluded that the Pentagon were engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack.

Farmer served as Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (officially known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States), and is also a former New Jersey Attorney General.

featured stories   9/11 Commission Counsel: Government Agreed to Lie About 9/11
John Farmer
John Farmer

Farmer’s book about his experiences working for the Commission is entitled The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11, and is set to be released tomorrow.

The book unveils how “the public had been seriously misled about what occurred during the morning of the attacks,” and Farmer himself states that “at some level of the government, at some point in time…there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened.”

Only the very naive would dispute that an agreement not to tell the truth is an agreement to lie. Farmer’s contention is that the government agreed to create a phony official version of events to cover-up the real story behind 9/11.

The publisher of the book, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, states that, “Farmer builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version not only is almost entirely untrue but serves to create a false impression of order and security.”

In August 2006, the Washington Post reported, “Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon’s initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.”

The report revealed how the 10-member commission deeply suspected deception to the point where they considered referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation.

“We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us,” said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. “It was just so far from the truth. . . . It’s one of those loose ends that never got tied.”

Farmer himself is quoted in the Post article, stating, “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The [Norad air defense] tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”

As we also reported in August 2006, released portions of NORAD tapes from 9/11, which were featured in a Vanity Fair article, do little to answer skeptic’s questions about the impotence of U.S. air defenses on 9/11 and if anything only increase focus on the incompatibility of the official version of events with what is actually known to have taken place on that day.

Make no mistake, Farmer is not saying that 9/11 was an inside job, however, Farmer’s testimony, along with that of his fellow 9/11 Commission members, conclusively demonstrates that, whatever really happened on 9/11, the official story as told to the public on the day and that which remains the authorities’ version of events today, is a lie – according to the very people who were tasked by the government to investigate it. This is a fact that no debunker or government apologist can ever legitimately deny.

Posted by ben on April 14th, 2009 No Comments

CBS Covers Robert Bowman and 9/11 Truth Event

February 28, 2009

Posted by ben on March 2nd, 2009 No Comments

Olbermann: ‘Fatuous, condescending lunatic’ Cheney tfailed o prevent 9/11

David Edwards and Muriel Kane
Published: Tuesday January 6, 2009

The eight years of Dick Cheney’s memorable vice-presidency will be over and done with two weeks from now, but MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann remains determined to get in his parting shots at “Crazy Vice-President Gate.”

On Monday, Olbermann found his opportunity in Cheney’s remarks on Face the Nation when asked whether we are better off than eight years ago.

“I think we’ve done some very good things in the course of the last eight years,” Cheney replied. “Defending the country against further terrorist attacks like 9/11 I think’s a major accomplishment, for example.”

Olbermann was clearly offended by Cheney’s claim that preventing another 9/11 meant the nation was now better off than before 9/11, but it was the remarks which followed that really got him steamed.

“There’s no question about what the new administration … are going to have their hands full with,” Cheney went on to say. “The new set of problems, if you will, centered especially on the economy … just as our task when we came in was ultimately to deal with the aftermath of 9/11.”

“Listen, you fatuous, condescending lunatic,” Olbermann erupted. “Your task was not to deal with the aftermath of 9/11 — it was to prevent 9/11.”

“And if you utterly whiffed,” concluded Olbermann, “on the most important test of all the presidencies in your lifetime, Mr. Cheney, you do not get credit for getting a C on the pop quizzes that followed.”

This video is from MSNBC’s Countdown, broadcast Jan. 5, 2008.

Posted by ben on January 6th, 2009 No Comments

FDNY Lieutenant Admitted Plan To ‘Take Down’ WTC 7

Reinforcing conviction that Silverstein was referring to demolition with infamous comments on PBS documentary

Paul Joseph Watson
Tuesday, December 23, 2008

Newly uncovered video from 9/11 featuring an interview with FDNY lieutenant David Rastuccio on MSNBC confirms that there was a plan to deliberately demolish WTC Building 7, as was originally indicated in Larry Silverstein’s infamous statement on the PBS documentary, America Rebuilds.

In the clip, Rastuccio responds to the host’s statement that “You guys knew this was coming all day,” by stating, “We had first reports that the building was unstable and that it was best for it to come down on its own or it would be taken down, I would imagine that it came down on its own.”

Though Rastuccio expresses his opinion that the building had collapsed without the aid of explosives, he admits that a plan had been in place to deliberately demolish the structure.

Watch the clip.

This reinforces the fact that when Larry Silverstein infamously told a 2002 PBS documentary that a consideration had been made to “pull it,” which is a demolition industry term for deliberate implosion, he did indeed mean that WTC 7 was considered for deliberate demolition.

This would mean that Silverstein’s later qualification of his comments, that “pull it” simply meant to pull the firefighters out of the building, despite FEMA’s assertion that no firefighting operations even took place inside WTC 7, was an outright lie intended to deflect possible ramifications arising out of the $7 billion dollar payout Silverstein received in insurance after the WTC complex was destroyed.

Numerous other eyewitnesses have come forward to express their conviction that WTC 7 was deliberately demolished.

Emergency Medical Technician Indira Singh described to a radio show how she learned that WTC 7 was going to be “brought down” and the context was clear that it was to be deliberately demolished.

“After midday on 9/11 we had to evacuate that because they told us Building 7 was coming down. If you had been there, not being able to see very much just flames everywhere and smoke – it is entirely possible – I do believe that they brought Building 7 down because I heard that they were going to bring it down because it was unstable because of the collateral damage,” said Singh.

Former Air Force Special Operations for Search and Rescue expert Kevin McPadden also reported his conviction that a countdown preceded the collapse of the building.

“While we were on the right side, there was firefighters getting ready, they were bussing them back and forth, and a couple of vets that were there – they got the vibe that something was coming down,” said McPadden.

“We started asking questions, everybody started asking questions, and the next thing you know there was a Red Cross representative pacing back and forth in front of the crowd holding his hand over the radio – I couldn’t hear what it was saying but it was like pulsed – whatever the speech was on there it was pulsed – and that means to me most likely it was a countdown.”

“But he took his hand off at the last three seconds and he gave this heartfelt look – like just run for your life – because he didn’t want to bring it on his conscience – he didn’t want to go to his grave with that – and then we had a couple of seconds to put our heads together,” said McPadden.

Former NYPD officer Craig Bartmer also reported hearing bombs tear down WTC 7 as he ran away from its collapse.

Several TV news networks received advance knowledge that the building was likely to collapse, with both the BBC and CNN reporting at least 26 minutes in advance that the building had already collapsed when it still stood.

Rastuccio’s newly uncovered comments about a plan to demolish Building 7 are likely to provoke a firestorm of fresh suspicion surrounding the implosion of the structurally reinforced 47-story skyscraper, which collapsed in 7 seconds within its own footprint despite suffering relatively minor damage from the collapse of the twin towers.

Posted by ben on January 5th, 2009 No Comments

What Do NORAD’s 9/11 Computer Chat Logs Reveal?

911 Blogger
Dec. 15, 2008

In April 2006, journalist Michael Bronner received in the post 30 hours of recordings he had requested from the Pentagon. These recordings, which came as a series of computer audio files on three CDs, had captured events on the operations floor at NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector throughout the day of September 11, 2001. [1] NORAD–the North American Aerospace Defense Command–is the military organization responsible for monitoring and defending the airspace of North America. Its Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS), based in Rome, New York, is responsible for monitoring and protecting 500,000 square miles of airspace above the northeast U.S., including the airspace over New York City and Washington, DC. [2] It was within this airspace that the 9/11 attacks occurred, and from the NEADS operations floor that the U.S. military’s response originated. Evidence of what happened there that day is clearly in the public interest and of obvious importance for attempts to unravel how the attacks were able to succeed. In an August 2006 Vanity Fair article based on the recordings, Bronner therefore referred to these “NORAD tapes” as “the authentic military history of 9/11.” [3]

However, the NORAD tapes are not the only record of the actions of NORAD and its Northeast Air Defense Sector on September 11. In her recent book Touching History: The Untold Story of the Drama that Unfolded in the Skies Over America on 9/11, commercial pilot and author Lynn Spencer revealed the existence of other crucial documentation. Yet, more than seven years on from 9/11, this record remains unreleased to the public and its contents are almost completely unknown.

Spencer described how, at around 9:25 a.m. on September 11, Master Sergeant Joe McCain, the mission crew commander technician at NEADS, received a call from the Continental U.S. NORAD Region (CONR) headquarters at Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida. Major General Larry Arnold and his staff at Tyndall had been trying to gather information about the ongoing crisis, and wanted to know the transponder codes for the two fighter jets that had been launched in response to the first hijacking. The CONR officer that made the call told McCain to “send [the transponder codes] out on chat.” By “chat,” he meant NORAD’s computer chat system. [4]

According to Spencer, the chat system used by NORAD that day was “similar to the chat rooms on most Internet servers, but classified.” It had three chat rooms that could be used by anyone with proper access. One room was specifically for NEADS, and connected its ID, surveillance, and weapons technicians to its alert fighter squadrons, and was where NEADS received status reports on fighter units and their aircraft. Another chat room was for CONR, and was where its three sectors–NEADS, the Western Air Defense Sector (WADS), and the Southeast Air Defense Sector (SEADS)–communicated with each other and could “upchannel” information to CONR headquarters. The third room was the Air Warfare Center (AWC), where senior NORAD commanders from the three NORAD regions–CONR, Canada, and Alaska–communicated with each other. Although NEADS was allowed to monitor this room, it could not type into it. [5]

Furthermore, when a training exercise was taking place, one or two additional chat windows would be open specifically for communicating exercise information, so as to help prevent it being confused with real-world information. [6] This fact is of particular significance, as the whole of NORAD, including the staff at NEADS, was involved in at least one major training exercise the morning of 9/11. The annual “Vigilant Guardian” exercise has been described as “an air defense exercise simulating an attack on the United States,” and was scheduled to include a simulated hijacking that day. [7] According to Larry Arnold, who was the commanding general of NORAD’s Continental U.S. Region, this exercise was only canceled after the second World Trade Center tower was hit at 9:03 a.m. [8]

NORAD kept paper logs of the communications that took place in its computer chat rooms. As Spencer described, at NEADS it was Joe McCain’s responsibility “to monitor the chats and keep paper logs of everything that is happening. … These chat logs help to keep everyone on the same page, but in a situation like the one unfolding [on 9/11] they have to be updated almost instantaneously to achieve that end.” [9] These logs are actually referred to in the notes at the back of the 9/11 Commission Report. However, this is only in relation to a single communication made across the chat system. As the report described: “At 10:31, General Larry Arnold instructed his staff to broadcast the following over a NORAD instant messaging system: ‘10:31 Vice president has cleared to us to intercept tracks of interest and shoot them down if they do not respond per [General Arnold].’” [10] This detail makes clear that crucial information was being communicated in the NORAD chat rooms. Yet, to date, we know practically nothing about what else was being discussed in them.

Clearly, the details of the NORAD chat logs for the day of 9/11 need to be made public and must be carefully examined. They may not tell us the full story of the U.S. military’s response to the attacks, nor give us all the answers we require about why the military failed so catastrophically to protect the nation. But they will surely fill a large gap in the puzzle.

[1] Michael Bronner, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes.” Vanity Fair, August 2006.
[2] Leslie Filson, Sovereign Skies: Air National Guard Takes Command of 1st Air Force. Panama City, FL: 1st Air Force, 1999, p. 51; Michael Bronner, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes.”
[3] Michael Bronner, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes.” The NORAD tapes were previously subpoenaed by the 9/11 Commission in November 2003. (See Philip Shenon, “9/11 Panel Issues Subpoena to Pentagon.” New York Times, November 8, 2003; Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, Without Precedent: The Inside Story of the 9/11 Commission. New York: Knopf, 2006, pp. 85-88.) However, the Commission played only a few short excerpts from the tapes, during its final public hearing on June 17, 2004. In August 2007, the producers of the popular 9/11 documentary film Loose Change received audio files of the NORAD tapes, which they made fully available to members of the public over the Internet. (See “NORAD Live and Uncut.” Official Loose Change Blog, August 30, 2007.)
[4] Lynn Spencer, Touching History: The Untold Story of the Drama That Unfolded in the Skies Over America on 9/11. New York: Free Press, 2008, p. 139.
[5] Ibid. p. 139.
[6] Ibid. pp. 139-140.
[7] Hart Seely, “Amid Crisis Simulation, ‘We Were Suddenly No-Kidding Under Attack.’” Newhouse News Service, January 25, 2002; Leslie Filson, Air War Over America: Sept. 11 Alters Face of Air Defense Mission. Tyndall Air Force Base, FL: 1st Air Force, 2003, pp. 41 and 122; Michael Bronner, “9/11 Live: The NORAD Tapes.”
[8] Leslie Filson, Air War Over America, p. 59.
[9] Lynn Spencer, Touching History, p. 140.
[10] 9/11 Commission, The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (Authorized Edition). New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2004, pp. 42 and 465-466.

Posted by ben on December 15th, 2008 No Comments

Hit TV Series To Feature 9/11 Conspiracy Plot

Paul Joseph Watson
Wednesday, December 3, 2008

The hit TV series Rescue Me, a drama about New York City firefighters, is set to feature a 9/11 conspiracy plot in the first ten episodes of the new series, according to the show’s main star Denis Leary.

Leary revealed the details during a book signing in Los Angeles, where he also offered his forthright personal opinion on the collapse of WTC Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that collapsed into its own footprint on the late afternoon of 9/11 despite not being hit by a plane.

“When asked by a hesitant fan as to whether or not the actor thought there should be a reinvestigation into the events leading up to and surrounding the 9/11 tragedy, Leary’s eyes lit up as he revealed that conspiracy and reinvestigation into 9/11 are, in fact, major plot lines in the first 10 episodes of Rescue Me season 5, set to premiere in April 2009 for a 22-episode run on FX,” reports L.A. Weekly.

But Leary deflected questions about the collapse of Building 7, stating, “You guys don’t want to get into that with me,” adding that he “knew several of the guys who had been there working to hold that building up.”

Perhaps Leary also knows some of the people who are on tape on 9/11 saying that the building is “about to blow up” too? Perhaps Leary can help explain how a massive skyscraper which had been structurally reinforced can implode within 7 seconds after suffering limited fires across no more than ten floors and in doing so completely defy the laws of physics?

Perhaps Leary’s friends can tell us why the Windsor Building in Madrid burned like a raging inferno for 24 hours yet retained its structural integrity?

The L.A. Weekly failed to report what happened at the end of the conversation. After the question about Building 7, security thugs stepped in, blocked the camera and proceeded to kick the protagonists out of the bookstore. There was no hostility or impoliteness on the part of the 9/11 truthers, but apparently Leary’s security thinks it necessary to physically eject anyone who expresses an opinion different to his.

Watch the clip below.

The real hero in all of this is obviously Daniel Sunjata, who co-stars in Rescue Me. Sunjata has been a vocal advocate for the 9/11 truth movement in questioning 9/11 and he likely had a massive influence on the decision of the script writers to dramatize the issue.

The prevalence of 9/11 truth in a plethora of different mediums is exactly what is required to spread the truth and wake up people who would not necessarily come into contact with this information through the usual channels.

We applaud the staff of Rescue Me for having the fortitude to tackle this vital issue.

Rescue Me star Daniel Sunjata.

Posted by ben on December 3rd, 2008 No Comments

Howard Zinn confronted by 9/11 truth activist’s in Montreal

After viewing the disappointing and disrespectful comments made by Howard Zinn on 09/10/08 in Colorado, responding to a request for help in spreading 9/11 awareness, Howard Zinn stated that he does not care about criminal accountability for the crimes of 09/11/01, because it is in the past. So we decided to attend his recent lecture at UQAM university to spread 9/11 truth, and welcome him to Montreal on behalf of the 9/11 victims, family members and the selfless 1st responders, for whom this attack will NEVER be in the past.


Posted by ben on November 21st, 2008 No Comments

School UNCENSORS “9/11 Truth Now Shirt”

We Are Change Ohio
November 18, 2008

We did it! Thanks to everyone who has a backbone and stood for civil rights. Thanks to all who called emailed and pushed the truth.

Posted by ben on November 19th, 2008 No Comments

Military judge in 9/11 case replaced

A new military judge has been named to the trial of accused September 11 mastermined Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and four other defendants at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, a Pentagon official said Monday.

Colonel Stephen Henley was tapped to replace Colonel Ralph Kohlmann, who will retire in April, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Kohlmann, who is the chief judge of the military commissions at Guantanamo, stepped down because he realized that the September 11 trial would not be completed by the time he retired, the official said.

“So he appointed Judge Steve Henley to take over the 9/11 case,” the official said.

The American Civil Liberties Union called the timing of the move “highly suspect and disturbing,” noting that it came a day after president-elect Barack Obama pledged in an interview with CBS Television to shut down Guantanamo.

“We cannot allow the Bush administration to sabotage president-elect Obama’s plans by ramming through these cases in its last days,” said Anthony Romero, the ACLU’s executive director.

Posted by ben on November 18th, 2008 No Comments

Howard Zinn: “I Don’t Care” If 9/11 Was An Inside Job

Paul Joseph Watson
Tuesday, November 18, 2008

World renowned peace activist and left-wing anti-war icon Howard Zinn recently told an audience that he didn’t care if 9/11 was an inside job, echoing the disdainful and apathetic rhetoric of fellow liberal gatekeepers Noam Chomsky and Alexander Cockburn in dismissing the efforts of the 9/11 truth movement.

Buddy Moore, Independent Candidate for US Senate in Colorado, asked Zinn if he would join him in voicing doubts about the official 9/11 story and in particular the demolition of the twin towers and Building 7.

Zinn said he was skeptical of the official story but then stated, “I don’t know much about the situation and the truth is, I don’t care that much about it, that’s passed….that’s a diversion from what we really have to do,” adding that debating who was behind 9/11, “gets in the way of dealing with the immediate situation”.

Moore attempted to ask Zinn a follow up question about allowing the perpetrators to go free but was largely shouted down by Zinn’s fawning army of left-wing sycophants.

Watch the clip below.

Zinn’s comments echo similar sentiments expressed by fellow left-wing luminary, Noam Chomsky, who has repeatedly expressed arrogance and contempt towards the 9/11 truth movement while invoking apathy towards the contention that there was government complicity in the attacks, despite the fact that the 9/11 attacks happening exactly as the government maintains was key to launching the invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the massive rollback in civil liberties that has occurred over the last seven years.

During a 2006 Internet forum event, Chomsky claimed that the 9/11 truth movement peddled “arcane and dubious theories” and had distracted activists from pursuing “crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC,” presumably belittling the deaths of around 2,000 Americans, along with hundreds of thousands of Afghanis and Iraqis, as well as thousands of U.S. troops in the wars that followed that could not have been launched without the pretext of 9/11.

When a critic asked Chomsky why he was so dismissive of the supposition that 9/11 was a false flag event, pointing out numerous other examples throughout history including the bombing of the Maine, the Gulf of Tonkin incident and Pearl Harbor, Chomsky merely reiterated his insolence, stating, “The concept of “false flag operation” is not a very serious one, in my opinion. None of the examples you describe, or any other in history, has even a remote resemblance to the alleged 9/11 conspiracy. I’d suggest that you look at each of them carefully.”

Chomsky actually dismissed U.S. government complicity in 9/11 a mere four months after the event, and over a year before it was again invoked as a reason to invade Iraq, when he told an audience at a FAIR event at New York’s Town Hall, 22 January 2002, “That’s an internet theory and it’s hopelessly implausible. Hopelessly implausible. So hopelessly implausible I don’t see any point in talking about it,” in response to a question about U.S. government foreknowledge.

Note that Professor Chomsky also vehemently maintains that Lee Harvey Oswald was the long gunman in the JFK assassination, even despite polls showing that around 80 per cent of the American public believe otherwise.

Chomsky was presented with convincing evidence for a wider plot by JFK assassination experts as far back as 1969 and according to Selwyn Bromberger, an MIT philosophy professor who had sit in on the discussion, Chomsky indicated that he believed there was a conspiracy, but has failed to voice his conclusion for nearly 40 years.

It’s painfully clear that the likes of Zinn and Chomsky are intellectual cowards who, despite being abundantly aware of the fact that both 9/11 and the JFK assassination represent far wider conspiracies than the official version of events dictates, they are afraid of using their prominent soapboxes to bring either subject to wider attention for fear of whatever reprisals might ensue. As Vincent Salandria enunciates, this makes them worse than disinformation agents.

“I agree that Professor Chomsky is not a CIA agent,” states Salandria, “But with respect to his pronouncements on the JFK assassination he is worse than a CIA agent. Without being an agent, with his enormous prestige as a thinker, as an independent radical, as a courageous man, he does the work of the agency.”

Indeed, at the time of the release of Oliver Stone’s JFK movie, Howard Zinn, Noam Chomsky and another liberal luminary, Alexander Cockburn, went on a seemingly orchestrated media campaign in an attempt to convince the public that the JFK assassination was not a wider conspiracy and also that it didn’t matter even if it was.

“When cornered themselves, Chomsky and Cockburn resort to rhetorical devices like exaggeration, sarcasm, and ridicule. In other words, they resort to propaganda and evasion,” notes one blogger.

The same rhetoric was utilized when questions about 9/11 reached a crescendo. Cockburn, Zinn and Chomsky not only dismiss clear evidence that the official story is demonstrably false, but in addition attempt to generate apathy around the whole issue, classic gatekeeper behavior in preventing the left from becoming active in pursuing the truth about 9/11.

Posted by ben on November 18th, 2008 No Comments