9/11 from a different perspective.

OK, so you read my comments in threads, and you hear me talk on ATS Live, and you've probably noticed that the recent anniversary of 9/11 has pulled me back into the subject a little.

And it got me thinking..

Theres a side to 9/11 that no one ever talks about. Sure, there is what people call the "Original Story", and then there is the "truth" movement - both have their proponents and both sides are equally as vocal.

If the truth movement is correct then the US government is complicit in the murder of 3000+ people.

If the "Original Story" people are correct, then terrorists hijacked planes and did their evil deeds and there was nothing anyone could do to thwart the despicable plan.

Hold that thought.

The third 9/11 angle is this... the people who were put in place to prevent, to protect, to analyse, to outhink, to defend... actually simply dropped the ball completely?

Since the start of the cold war the US population has slept safely at night knowing the US armed forces are watching the skies, ready to defend the homeland and retaliate on a moments notice. Theres been a steady feeding of propaganda about the armed services, (some of it justified, I must add, I am a fan of the US military), the CIA, the NSA etc. I would vouch that most people in the western world hold the US military and intelligence services in very high regard.

But... the cold war ended in 1990. The fighters and interceptors were stood down. The Russians stopped probing with their bombers and intelligence flights. No one was coming. Quick Reaction Alert became something of the past. The birds weren't armed - there were only 14 fighters ready to fly that day covering the whole of the continental US. 14. Think about that. Things got...sloppy?

Likewise, the professional mystique of NORAD, those steely people in the mountain that are ready to unleash armageddon if need be and make the really difficult choices as soon as they see inbounds... dropped the ball. They simply didn't seem to know what to do. The command and control faltered, and failed.

Even the secret service, ostensibly responsible for the protection of the President and key to the continuity of government left Bush in a school for a period of time - even though it was advertised he would be there- and allowed Rumsfeld to initially go missing for a period of time and then tour the rubble of the Pentagon when really he should have been out of the way.

Then theres the "intelligence" services who seem to have missed the whole trick completely.

So whats my point? Well... when you think 9/11, you think of terrorism. But maybe, just maybe you ought to think about lethargy. About false pride. About taking things for granted.

The "truth" movement is founded on the fact that people simply can't believe an organised group could carry out such an attack on US soil.

That belief is based on an assumption of competancy in the system, that it simply couldn't happen to the US, because everything was in place to prevent it.

I'm not knocking the general US armed services here, because I know they are made up of men and women who do their level best for their country - but heres the scary part - what if the people who are paid to make the really really tough decisions froze, and simply had no clue what to do, because - in all honesty - they never thought it would happen, and never prepared themselves for the day it did?

Its the one debate that no one ever really has. The competancy debate. Forget stand downs, collusions and supposed explosive demolitions and think about completely failed government in a time of crisis

Isn't that scary?

I think its an idea, which should still warrant a lot of jail time for negligence. Plus a complete overhaul, by firing those who were insubordinate. Its sad, but if it was the OS story, people still messed up and should get put in jail. There was no punishment for the people who failed to protect us. You atleast get fired. I'm sorry to be that guy who says we need to punish those who don't do their job, when their job is to secure hundreds of millions of people.

I think you have hit on something here. I know I have pondered something similar myself. And all things equal, the idea that the US Government failed dramatically is not only rather feasible, but down right frightening. That would be something very much worthy of hiding because those in charge would never want the enemy to know that our pants were down.

That would also explain the dramatic overreaction with PATRIOT and Homeland (in)Security

I don't know if anyone saw the show today on nat.geo channel called "witness 911 dc" they showed a part were this man picks up a piece of the plane from the pentagon and says "this is to light to be a commercial plane,this isn't a commercial plane,"and hands it to another guy and he says"look here there's a logo, its a marine corps emblem on it." all the videos and everything. I have read on 911 this was a first.And me personally Its not I don't think that 'TERRORIST"couldn't have attacked us its all the evidence points to a cover-up in our government.

reply to post by TWILITE22


I haven't seen it. I will look. I do though recall many cabinet members and other government officials completely lying about pretty basic stuff. Some of which would fit into the OP's theory. For instance, Rice and anyone else who stated "we couldn't have forseen them using planes.." Uh, yes you could have. Anyone with nintendo could have given you the idea of using planes, and we know you had training manuals with the towers and speaking about crashing planes into buildings.

Its one things to mess up your job, but you have to be honest and own up to your mistake. If you don't own up to it, we're left with endless wars, and countless conspiracies.

reply to post by neformore


Not having the Responders respond in a responsible manner lends more credence to the Truth movement side.

And the fact that NO one (except Saddam Hussein who wasn't even involved) has been held accountable and punished in 9 years again......leaves the average person with an average IQ scratching his average head wondering: Whose covering this up and................why????
And to add insult to the injury some of you even elected these people (who should've been held responsible) again for four more years!

Although you're bringing up a pertinent point and a different prospective, it still really boils down to two sides. The Truthers and the Trusters. Take your pick!

Before I joined ATS I thought it was a perfectly planned al-queda terrorist act and the american government got caught off-guard. After I joined ATS I became convinced the american secret government hired al-queda to do what they did so pax-americana could attack iraq and afghanistan with few oppossing the plan.

Lets look at the facts one by one

1)The president and vice president knew of an immenent threat that year or perhaps even that month according to a cia report.

2)Everyone saw two hijacked planes hit the twin towers and fires burning out of control for at least an hour before the two skyscrapers came down. Could structural damage at the upper levels bring down the rest of the building? I think not!

3)Everyone saw a plane at the pentagon vicinity but not everyone saw a plane hit the pentagon. Allegedlly a plane did hit the pentagon but the pentagon cannot prove this in the slightest. The wreckage area is way too small for a boeing 757 or boeing 767 and an aluminum plane destroying reinforced concrete seems highely unlikely.

4)Immediately after 9-11 everyone "knew" al-queda was responsible eventhough the "investigation" was only a few days old. If this is not evidence of prior knowledge then I don't know what exactly is! Yes we saw the alleged terrorists pass security checkpoints and board planes on cctv, but how did they know who did what if all the passengers got killed? Maybe its simply a case of lets blame muslim passengers......

5)America and britain attacked afghanistan to get rid of the taliban that supported al-queda training camps and then attacked iraq to get rid of sadam who supposedly had weapons of mass destruction and supported al-queda eventhough both the allegations against saddam were wrong.

My conclusion is america knew when al-queda was going to strike and they aided them with their evil intentions. It is my opinion america and europe needed an excuse to enlarge the military-industrial complex and the collective powers of government over we the people. What better way to do so then to exaggerate threats out of porportion so a relatively few can benefit at the expense of the rest. Isn't that what disaster capitalism is all about?

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


I don't know what the final conclusion is besides the horrible outcome that has come of it. I think theres a lot involved that we may or may not have come close to mentioning. We need a large scale investigation into every aspect of the events. Doc those who didn't do their job. Punish those with foreknowledge. And god help us if it is proven they were involved. Though it should be televised, on the internet, not MSM.

Originally posted by neformore
The "truth" movement is founded on the fact that people simply can't believe an organised group could carry out such an attack on US soil.

That belief is based on an assumption of competancy in the system, that it simply couldn't happen to the US, because everything was in place to prevent it.

You couldn't be more wrong. The truth movement (no need for quotes) is based on hundreds of anomalies, cover-ups, omissions and outright impossibilities in the government's official story -- everything from steel-framed skyscrapers that defied the laws of physics by collapsing at free-fall speeds from fire damage (for the first time in history), to a lightly damaged WTC 7 that neatly collapsed on it's footprint without being hit by a plane, explosive thermite being found in the WTC dust, testimony of numerous first-responders and WTC employees who heard explosions before and after any plane impacted, "hijacker" pilots who couldn't rent a Cessna the month before 9/11 because they "couldn't fly at all", no Arab names being on the initial passenger manifests, "hijackers" who, according to MSM reports are still alive, a complete lack of 757 wreckage at the Pentagon, no black boxes recovered from the WTC wreckage, immediate confiscation of CCTV videotapes by the FBI from businesses near the Pentagon, refusal by the government to release any videos or photos of whatever impacted the Pentagon, the arrest of five Mossad agents on 9/11 driving a van packed with "tons of explosives" who according to police were in possession of circled maps and other "evidence linking them to the attacks", hundreds of architects, engineers, pilots and government officials (both foreign and domestic) who outright reject the official story and claim US and Israeli government complicity, etc., etc.

Originally posted by neformore
Isn't that scary?

What's really scary is an ATS 9/11 forum mod who actually postulates that 9/11 could be the result of government incompetence (foundation of the official story) and who willfully ignores a mountain of incriminating evidence.

Good thread op.S&F and all that. I have always leaned towards either government involvment or at least negligence all around although the goverment had the most to gain look at the laws and agencies created in the aftermath of the attacks and you will see that on almost every level the government had benifited the most since then.

reply to post by neformore


If we were to have a new and independent investigation of 9/11; is it then possible that the outcome of the investigation would show incompetency and apathy on the part of those in charge? Answer: Possibly.

But then that also means that somebody needs to be held accountable. And with that, you're back to the problem with the OS. That this was a complete, bolt-out-of-the-blue, attack that the Fed. Govt. could have never seen coming.

Even after the last major "surprise" attack upon American soil (Pearl Harbor), there was an investigation and members of the military were blamed and punished. But after 9/11 we have nothing. Not one single person on the american side is to blame or did anything wrong.

reply to post by GoldenFleece


Fantastic points! The real smoking gun in all of this is why they can't show us evidence of what impacted the pentagon. Its the most closely guarded building in the entire world with hundreds, if not thousands, of cctv cameras, yet they can't show us anything......

Then the fbi confisticates PRIVATE CCTV from nearby businesses. Sorry but those are desperate tactics and proves they have something to hide. What about the plane flying nearby and the downed light poles? Where did it go if it didn't hit the pentagon? Did it just fly over and then explosives went off? Damm its complicated!

Originally posted by neformore
If the truth movement is correct then the US government is complicit in the murder of 3000+ people.

It's not the whole U.S. government. Just a handful of elitists who were able to regain power and carry out their plan.

Originally posted by neformore
The "truth" movement is founded on the fact that people simply can't believe an organised group could carry out such an attack on US soil.

That is absolutely, utterly, completely false. The truth movement was founded based on victims families not having their questions answered by the 9/11 Commission. There were people in the Usenets before dinner on 9/11 that knew it was an inside job. Many engineers and construction workers knew that those towers came down with explosives. At least one news anchor even knew that the towers came down with explosives and other news anchors compared all three towers' collapses to controlled demolitions. And add on top of that everything that GoldenFleece said.

But just because it looks like a controlled demolition doesn't mean it was one. That's where you look at other evidence. Evidence of flashes going up, down and around both towers with "popping or exploding sounds", puffs, and BOOM BOOM BOOMs. All signs of controlled demolitions as well.

Too many people make up, speculate, and theorize away the evidence so that the official fairytale can still be relevant in their minds. But not a single person is providing evidence of their speculations or theories.

I'm begging someone, anyone: please find a fire-induced collapse of a building that produces flashes, puffs, and BOOM BOOM BOOMs that is not from a controlled demolition. Why is it so hard for any of you skeptics to provide some sort of evidence to support the official fairytale when all other facts prove otherwise?

Originally posted by neformore
what if the people who are paid to make the really really tough decisions froze, and simply had no clue what to do, because - in all honesty - they never thought it would happen, and never prepared themselves for the day it did?

You gotta be kidding me, Nef. Have you ever been in the military? I don't know how the military is in the U.K., but here in the states, soldiers don't go through boot camp and then sit on their asphalts for the rest of their military careers. They train hard, every single day for any and every scenario imaginable, at all levels of the military and government.

Just because our military didn't have as many fighters ready as we used to, doesn't mean for a second that they weren't ready and prepared at all times for any scenario.

Originally posted by neformore
Its the one debate that no one ever really has. The competancy debate.

If anyone was incompetent, heads would have rolled. But they didn't. Instead, heads were promoted. Most every single head that had power on 9/11 was promoted. How ironic is that?

"You guys did such a good job on 9/11 that you're all promoted!" What a friggin crock.


Interesting theory, Nef. But that's not anywhere near where the evidence leads.

Originally posted by TWILITE22
Its not I don't think that 'TERRORIST"couldn't have attacked us its all the evidence points to a cover-up in our government.

Thank you! The 9/11 truth movement has nothing to do with not believing in terrorists or any of that other such nonsense. Look at the evidence. 9/11 was an inside job because of the evidence, nothing more.

Originally posted by Human_Alien
some of you even elected these people (who should've been held responsible) again for four more years!

Oh no, rigged voting machines in 2000 and 2004 elected those criminals. Gore got more. Never forget that phrase. Gore got more!

Originally posted by mike dangerously
look at the laws and agencies created in the aftermath of the attacks and you will see that on almost every level the government had benifited the most since then.

Exactly. Not to mention the quadrupled+ defense budget.

Originally posted by The Baby Seal Club
Even after the last major "surprise" attack upon American soil (Pearl Harbor), there was an investigation and members of the military were blamed and punished. But after 9/11 we have nothing. Not one single person on the american side is to blame or did anything wrong.

And as I stated earlier, they were all promoted!

someone needs to make a timeline of events, and reports, and then counter reports, and then maybe a summary so it would be easy for the reast of those asleep, to being able to understand what the evidence actually shows.

we should collaborate and connect these timelines... anyone?

9/11 wasn't just a day with secret war-games and 4 botched interceptions.

The obvious cover-up is not just the result of a completely surprised and embarrassed government, military- and intelligence apparatus which joined forces in an attempt to hide criminal negligence with the help of a kowtowing 9-11-Commission.

Even if I exclude the physical evidence from the 3 WTC-towers, Shanksville and the Pentagon, there remains overwhelming circumstantial evidence pointing to an inside-job.

Before 9/11 Able Danger identified 3 from 4 hijacker-cells. They determined, that these cells were active (no sleeper-cells), warned their superiors and tried to take action. Their efforts were blocked and their data destroyed.

Miraculous evidence incriminating the highjackers was quickly found at unlikely places (Attas passport, testament, multiple Korans, Attas bags and a OBL-confession-video), while other standard-evidence was never presented. For example: All airports, from where the highjackers departed, were run by the security firm ICTS. Not a single surveillance-video showing the highjackers was recorded on 9/11.

A plan to attack Afghanistan was signed by Bush the 10th September 2001.

The patriot act was already written.

The two senators who could block the patriot act got the deadliest anthrax-letters. Afterwards everyone in Washington was scared, and the patriot act was quickly passed.
The anthrax-letters were sent from the same cities were the hijacker-cells had been located before.

Even before the first anthrax-letter was opened, the White House and some journalists started to take Cipro as a preventive measure.

Even before the first anthrax-letter was opened, a possible impeding anthrax-attack was already linked to Al Qaeda and an Iraqi-bioweapons-programme.

The anthrax which was in the anthrax-letters was from the ames-strain. The letters were not send by Al Qaida. The anthrax came out of an US-government laboratory.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


Oh no doubt.....there were rigged Diebold machines galore but there were still THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of cars sporting Bush '04 stickers on them!

Now...I am not a violent person at all but I tell ya, my blood actually boiled every time I saw one of those bumper stickers. How can you vote for a leader who, to that day (Nov 04) did NOTHING for his country except send thousands of kids to war and..... in the wrong country!!???!!!

Originally posted by Drunkenshrew
Even before the first anthrax-letter was opened, a possible impeding anthrax-attack was already linked to Al Qaeda and an Iraqi-bioweapons-programme.

Senator Tom Daschle and Tom Brokaw were targeted with these modified and highely lethal anthrax spores.

They were allegedly developed at fort detrick(a bio-weapons facility) in maryland and spread from the new jersey/new york area. An egyptian scientist was the prime suspect but then charges were dropped against him for some "odd reason"......and they blamed iraq!

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


One of the two deadliest letters was send to Senator Daschle. Daschle was 2001 the Senate Majority Leader.

The other deadly letter was send to Senator Leahy, who was the Chairman of the Judicary Committee. Leahy is one of the leading privacy advocates. Leahy had in the past informed the public by showing an unclassified draft report on the Iran-Contra affair to a news reporter. He was also the main sponsor of the Leahy law, which is a human rights stipulation in the U.S. congressional foreign assistance legislation. The Leahy Law prohibits U.S. military assistance to foreign military units that violate human rights with impunity. This should make assistance to a country which uses DU-munition in urbanized areas and uses white phosphorous against civilian populations illegal.

Those two letters read:
YOU CAN NOT STOP US.
WE HAVE THIS ANTHRAX.
YOU DIE NOW.
ARE YOU AFRAID?
DEATH TO AMERICA.
DEATH TO ISRAEL.
ALLAH IS GREAT.

The Egyptian you mentioned is named Ayaad Assaad. He was framed in an anonymous letter. The anonymous letter was send before the first anthrax-letter was even opened! The FBI determined quickly Assaad's innocence. But somehow they failed to investigate, who framed Ayaad Assaad. This anonymous letter-sender must have had foreknowledge.

Later Steven Hatfill was framed and harassed. He won a 5 million settlement in court.

Bruce E. Ivins was the last person which was harassed by the FBI. He allegedly committed a painful suicide. The FBI has never proven his guilt in a court. All his colleagues and journalists who investigate this case are more or less convinced, that he is innocent. Attorney Barry Kissin is especially passionate in his defence of Bruce Ivins.
www.informationclearinghouse.info...

noliesradio.org...

The Al Qaeda/Iraq/Anthrax connection I was referring to, was an alleged meeting between Mohammed Atta and an Iraqi consul in Prague. Colin Powell used a little vial during his UN-speech to highlight the danger of Saddam Hussein giving bioweapons to terrorists. The story of the meeting between Atta and the consul was first published at the 18th September 2001. It was repeated by countless Neocon mouthpieces. This alleged meeting never happened. It is an invented myth.
en.wikipedia.org...

Here is a video by Ryan Dawson who explains the letter-timeline (the important part starts at 2:12):

Originally posted by Myendica
someone needs to make a timeline of events, and reports, and then counter reports, and then maybe a summary so it would be easy for the reast of those asleep, to being able to understand what the evidence actually shows.

we should collaborate and connect these timelines... anyone?

Such a timeline already exists. It is the website historycommons.org. The timeline is a great tool.

The History Commons contains summaries of 16,470 events, which are published on the website in the format of dynamic timelines. These timelines can be filtered by investigative project, topic, or entity (e.g., a person, organization, or corporation). You can even generate a “scalable context” timeline for any event in the History Commons database simply by clicking the date of the timeline entry. You can search for events by using the search box at the top right-hand corner, or by browsing through the list of projects.

www.historycommons.org...

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
What's really scary is an ATS 9/11 forum mod who actually postulates that 9/11 could be the result of government incompetence (foundation of the official story) and who willfully ignores a mountain of incriminating evidence.

Oh, really? Why thanks.

Just because I'm a 9/11 forum mod doesn't mean I have to jump through the hoops of the truth movement.

I prefer to think independently, thank you very much. You ought to try it some time.