CIA Threatens 9/11 Researchers After Discovery Of Cover Up

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by soulwaxer

 

Lets not go assuming each other's positions. I didn't say the CIA knew and tracked them to a T. FDR and those history has come to suspect knew of and allowed Pearl Harbor didn't have an itinerary for the attack or schedule to expect, either. They just knew something was in the works, it was BIG, and letting it happen was preferable to quietly preventing it for FDR's belief that the US HAD to get into the war and that was the way to see it happen.

For 9/11? I don't know anything for sure, and that''s the first thing to establish, of course. It's all theory and until or unless we get a real investigation worth the name? We may only ever have theories to guess on, for how messed up everything related to this has become.

However, US Intelligence (CIA is just one piece and not the most powerful OR dangerous piece, at that) has been known to "let nature take it's course" before and Pearl Harbor was only the most visible and catastrophic example (prior to 9-11..possibly).

In terms of knowing the date and hour? There is also a very real factor of not WANTING to know details beyond a certain point. Plausible deniability down to a poly exam later is part of that, I'd think ...but it's also enough to know it's coming, when timing isn't important to long term planning and the men watching have infinite patience.

Do you really believe that the CIA would watch these hijackers and let them go ahead with their little plot, without any control of the situation? They just sat it out in the hope that it would be successful??

Do you honestly believe, if you've done the hours of legwork to read up personally, Pearl Harbor came as a total shock from left field to President Roosevelt? .....I think Bush was just as surprised, and in roughly the same ways for the same reasons. Not expecting it that day ...but knowing it was coming soon.

edit on 5-1-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

OK, so the secret service just let them run wild, hoping for the best? How would they know that they wouldn't be in the wrong place during the attack? (You will notice that Donald Rumsfeld was at the Pentagon, but lucky enough to be on the opposite side of the missile strike). That alone would be an excellent reason to keep tabs on the whole operation, to a T.

This is not WW2. Times have changed since Pearl Harbor, in a big way. You must have noticed that the US has massively increased its power, influence, technology, etc.. since then.

soulwaxer

Quite a interesting interview i must say.

On the issue however of poor inter agency communication and cooperation regarding 9/11 it is a theme that runs through all of literature regarding 9/11. Steve Coll's book Ghost war's goes into quite a lot of detail regarding this poor cooperation (sourcing Richard Clarke several times), I am not going to provide any kind of details all i would say is read the book. The summary given in the video that the CIA where "covering their own asses" I would say is accurate. The 9/11 commission talks about it as well about how at a high level communication and rivalry as well as the sorry state of the bureaucracy that contributed to the attacks succeeding, particularly during the clition administration (Tarnak farm anyone!). This is not something that is in anyway being covered up at any higher level they are very open about the fact that the "system was blinking red".

Its very interesting the way he talks about Coffer Black, a very interesting character, who Bin Laden's cronies once tried to assassinate. Furthermore its quite clear that after 9/11 a Al-Aulaqi they were trying to turn him to become a informant so the possibility of the CIA having made a attempt to recruit these guys is possible but it does not mean that the CIA were complicit in any kind of false flag.

Another thing i would say is that Richard Clarke is a G-Man, i trust what he says but look at what he has to say in the contest of what others have to say, you could also look at what Ali Soufan and Michael Scheuer have to say on these matters.

Very interesting video though OP.

soulwaxer
OK, so the secret service just let them run wild, hoping for the best? How would they know that they wouldn't be in the wrong place during the attack?

Heres some of Philip Marshalls take on it ,,before he was found dead
who trained the 9/11 hijacker to fly jetliners

FBI evidence of the cell would confirm that the hijacking team of American 77 had formed and operated separately with direct financial support from top-level members of the Saudi government, bitter enemies of al Qaeda. The picture was beginning to clear.

From this point in the research, the guilt needle began pointing steadily toward Saudi Arabia, in part because 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis. With every new piece of evidence, that needle does not fluctuate. As the focus narrowed on San Diego, the footprints of a large Saudi contingent began to appear. Congressional investigators had found, within buried FBI files, evidence that United States Senators would later call “undeniable” that top Saudi officials had known that terrorists were entering the U.S. beginning in 2000 in preparation for some sort of attack. These same officials are among those who work with American oil companies and regulate the flow of crude oil to the United States, the same Saudi officials that regulate the price that has gone from $30 per barrel to over $140 post 911.

One Saudi official in particular, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, Saudi Ambassador to the United States from 1983 to 2005, was quickly traced to direct funding of the hijackers, through cashier’s checks, not from him he would say, but from his wife. Alabama Senator Richard Shelby, Maine Senator Susan Collins and Florida Senator Bob Graham learned that Saudi officials had directed agents in the United States to assist the future hijackers. These senators would quietly back out of the investigation after the White House threatened them with “leaking classified information” and a criminal probe. Senator Graham was told in no uncertain terms to back off and shut up in telephone calls from Vice President Cheney. This evidence alone on the Saudis provided more plausibility than two chapters of KSM’s ramblings. Here was opportunity to provide airplanes and instructors for hijackers who were solidly linked to Saudi operatives working for Prince Bandar

As I read through the 911 Commission’s report, I noticed that something had drawn all the hijackers out west on several occasions. The 911 Commission reported that each pilot/hijacker had made multiple trips to Las Vegas in the spring and summer of 2001; the commission had “no explanation” for this destination. But, logically, the vast Mojave and Sonoran Deserts would be the perfect training ground for practicing a high-to-low-altitude, coordinated attack.

Initially, I focused on the many airline storage airports scattered throughout the southwestern deserts, where various airliners come and go without drawing much attention. Major airlines operate leased aircraft owned by investment banks. As an airline’s fleet requirements change, planes are routinely parked while new lease agreements are negotiated. The dry desert preserves the planes’ avionics and interiors while they sit, sometimes for years at a stretch. As I conducted a search throughout the deserts using Google Earth, one airport north of Tucson began to stick out.

At the same time, from several old Iran-Contra sources I began hearing about a hush-hush airport used by the government contractor and mercenary outfit Blackwater, to train covert, special operations flight crews. I soon learned that major flight training had been conducted in the middle of the night with military and civilian airplanes in top-secret fashion. Blackwater is one of several operators that use the very airport I had run across — Pinal Airpark, a secluded desert facility near the town of Marana, Arizona, and near the former home of Saudi Arabian pilot Hani Hanjour, the hijacker pilot of American 77. I discovered that over 80 perfectly airworthy commercial airliners are scattered around the airport and heavily guarded by a mercenary army with covert Saudi ties. The opportunities are perfect to “borrow” a Boeing for unlimited and undocumented air training in the dedicated practice range over the desert. The means and the opportunity to slip hijackers in for training were all in place.

reply to post by TDawgRex


thanks for your input tdawg. I can deal with incompetence on lower levels like airport security...those are just regular people...prone to mistakes.

But incompetence on higher levels is not incompetence...it's negligence. Negligence to the position you were put in to protect the people, to defend them when they need you. Perhaps once in every 50 years there comes a point were you are called upon to exercise your years of govt. training, military training, protocols that were put in place for certain situations...and what happens...it all falls apart like a house of cards.

Its a relief to hear somebody bring up the Navada airport.
I read that the possibility exists that these highjackers trained under CIA (or Blackwater) sponsorship, in the desert.
Cant say where i came across the info.....but ive also heard the highjackers were under FBI protection in California.....
The information is being obfuscated and buried as fast as possible but the traces remain they cannot cover as yet.....
9/11 really WAS an INSIDE JOB.....no doubt in my mind anymore....too many hidden and buried facts have emerged over time to deny it..........IMHO of course.....
aside from that....i think that it was the Dov Zackhiem company which wired the planes for remote control as well...........

reply to post by soulwaxer

OK, so the secret service just let them run wild, hoping for the best? How would they know that they wouldn't be in the wrong place during the attack? (You will notice that Donald Rumsfeld was at the Pentagon, but lucky enough to be on the opposite side of the missile strike). That alone would be an excellent reason to keep tabs on the whole operation, to a T.

The Secret Service has nothing to do with any of this and particularly prior to 9/11, the U.S. Government was anything but open with sharing much for information about one areas activities with another area unless there was direct overlap someone wanted the other to know about. It's part of what led to what made 9-11 possible this way, whether it happened with or without other factors here.


Now in terms of where people were that morning? I'm glad you brought that up.....It's a part many seem to leave out but it's a BIG detail. Had those attacks happened as it's believed they were MEANT to? The United States would have ended the day with only the Supreme Court left as a functional area of Government ..and I'm not certain all 9 of them would have survived. I don't know where ALL 9 were that morning.

However, Congress was in full session with both Houses. Congress was in one spot to hit at one time. The Vice President was, as I've understood it, at the White House along WITH both daughters and the First Lady. (That is a SMALL house in these terms, if you've ever seen it in person. TV makes it look MUCH bigger) So George Bush would have basically lost his whole world and ability to function as a man, within a day ....Congress would have been dead or dying and ..had it worked as they seemed to want? New York would have had 30,000-50,000 or more casualties with, ontop of the rest, a devastating hit to the financial core.

That attack was intended to decapitate the United States Government in a short term, if not ongoing way and it damn near succeeded but for very bad timing in synchronizing events and something with the flight over PA. What, precisely, will likely never be known with 100% certainty.

As always...my personal opinions, developed over 40 years of life experience. No two are likely to agree entirely....or agree at all.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

On the issue however of poor inter agency communication and cooperation regarding 9/11 it is a theme that runs through all of literature regarding 9/11. Steve Coll's book Ghost war's goes into quite a lot of detail regarding this poor cooperation (sourcing Richard Clarke several times), I am not going to provide any kind of details all i would say is read the book. The summary given in the video that the CIA where "covering their own asses" I would say is accurate. The 9/11 commission talks about it as well about how at a high level communication and rivalry as well as the sorry state of the bureaucracy that contributed to the attacks succeeding, particularly during the clition administration (Tarnak farm anyone!). This is not something that is in anyway being covered up at any higher level they are very open about the fact that the "system was blinking red".

I think this is a cop out for the entire event. Think about it...Clarcke states...that if all had been the "usual" he would have gotten the memo...he would expect to get the memo. He even states that he was getting daily reports on far lower level threats from the CIA. Yet...on this instance...they kept their moths shut...

Claiming the usual agencies not cooperating seems like bull...Clarke says Tenet even used to call him at 7:30 in the morning to discuss various threats.

Quote:

"every morning...I come to work and turn on my computer...I get 150 CIA reports. I'm not relying on somebody calling me, and telling me things. You have to intentionally stop it. You have to intervene and say...no...I don't want this report to go...and I never got a report to that effect"

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly


Hey Mario, I just wanted to say thanks for bringing up this very different aspect of that whole event for something different to look at.

Whatever happened those few hours of Sept 11 likely forms just one part and the final part of a much longer process we've only been told bits and pieces of ..at best. The devil is always in the details and enough details have been dropped or omitted here to fill libraries with.

Clarke is one I've always paid some attention to. I haven't always agreed with his material, but he's got his head on straight and I believe he was one of the good guys, to the extent that can be said.

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly


In defense of my government and the CIA, NSA, what have you.
And their obvious worship of the ancestral elite demi gods and
their corporate seats of power, that willingly sacrifices it's own
countrymen and women and children as they have always done
at least since antiquity. Recognizing also that they have engineered
the dismantling of everything the american people hold so dear
in this country.

I have absolutely not one damn thing to say.
On the contrary and even tho I should know better.

I hope they all burn.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Thanks Wrabbit. I don't feel it's an entirely different angle...and this inter agency cooperation has been debated in various threads. But, indeed...I have never actually heard from someone so high up that there was a cock up and who messed up. Clarke goes almost to the point of outright accusing CIA. In this day of age when responsibilities are thrown around like a hot potato...feel nice to point some fingers with concrete evidence.

I guess it just makes me mad...I'm not a US citizen...and perhaps shouldn't care...but in this day of age...if your president farts...in rains in Croatia...if Wall street crashes....I feel it on my pay....if you catch my drift. It's all connected to the point that I almost feel like an American. All your policies matter world wide...

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly


I would agree that it is a cop out but only to a certain extent.

It is undeniable when you read through the literature on this subject that the national security apparatus of the United States was broken with inept leadership and a fear of bureaucracy and terrorism was not the number one priority as it is in our post-9/11 world. Is it a cop out to say they were not communicating as they should have been, you bet, I personally think that charges should have been pursued for negligence. However that does not make it any less true, I often think that a danger with 9/11 is that people dont quite appreciate just how much the national security apparatuses of America has changed since the attacks. You have to remember prior to 9/11 there had not been a plane hijacking in America for decades for example, so when a low level FBI agent writes a memo about a few suspicious guys in flight training school, its not going to be taken seriously in the pre-9/11 mentality. In a similar fashion in the run up to the 9/11 attacks there had never been this kind of attack, there was a poor understanding of how to fight this kind of terrorism.

I understand what you are saying and i agree to a extent but i do not think that a piss-poor national security apparatus prior to 9/11 is evidence that it was elements of that same group who were really behind the attacks, if you are going to make that claim then you have the burden of proof. I have yet to have seen anything that has "proved" it was a inside job. I have seen lots of stuff that will raise a brow when looked at in isolation but i have not seen anything that proves that the whole story of "they" blew up the buildings to be true when viewed in the wider context of the 9/11 saga

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly


It's well known the US gov't was well aware of the attack, the attackers, even a timeframe, but nothing was done to thwart it. So whether you believe in an inside job or not, the fact is the US govt was well aware of the impending attack and did NOTHING about it. And too boot, no one in gov't was suspended, fired, or brought up on investigation. Everyone blamed everyone else, as usual, and on the emotions of the American people their gov't took advantage of this and invaded the Middle East.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

Now in terms of where people were that morning? I'm glad you brought that up.....It's a part many seem to leave out but it's a BIG detail. Had those attacks happened as it's believed they were MEANT to? The United States would have ended the day with only the Supreme Court left as a functional area of Government ..and I'm not certain all 9 of them would have survived. I don't know where ALL 9 were that morning.

I just wanted to comment on this bit...I agree with you to a certain degree...that the whole thing probably didn't turn out as "planned". But...I don't think there was a plan to do much else...except the last plane that "crashed". If it was planned for the UA93 to go for Washington...than it was extremely poorly planned. That plane should have been the first hit...if they really planned for maximum effect...

Think about it from a logical perspective...If you wanted to hit hard at the administration...than you wouldn't have firstly crashed into towers...thus sounding the alarm and giving all the big players time to hide...don't you think ? You would have attacked DC first...New York would than be far more easier with all the attention turning to defend the Capitol.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

I personally think that charges should have been pursued for negligence. However that does not make it any less true, I often think that a danger with 9/11 is that people dont quite appreciate just how much the national security apparatuses of America has changed since the attacks. You have to remember prior to 9/11 there had not been a plane hijacking in America for decades for example, so when a low level FBI agent writes a memo about a few suspicious guys in flight training school, its not going to be taken seriously in the pre-9/11 mentality. In a similar fashion in the run up to the 9/11 attacks there had never been this kind of attack, there was a poor understanding of how to fight this kind of terrorism.

I appreciate that the apparatus has changed since than. I also appreciate the fact...that the event of such magnitude hasn't been around since...well Pearl Harbour...the JFK thing..I think involved far fewer people.

But, you seem to want to ignore the fact about Clarke saying...that he would get the memo...because it was automatic, even then. So in this case...competence is a non issue...there was an automatic system installed that should have alerted someone...and Clarke says..due to nature of the system..somebody had to intervene and stop that specific report.

That screams intent...It may not scream Inside Job right away...but boy...wouldn't I like to hear the reason for omitting that specific report.

piss-poor national security apparatus prior to 9/11

Don't sell your guys short...maybe it was piss poor...but it was most certainly best in the world, no ? Maybe you can hint who had better security in the world at the time.

America was and is...the mightiest nation in the world...due to it's economic and military power...I doubt anyone had it better.

So calling it piss poor is a bit exageration. Maybe even...a cop out

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

 

They had that sitting there waiting patiently for nature to take it's course.

You can't possibly believe that.

If these scumbags wrote up the Patriot Act before 911, rest assured they weren't waiting for "nature" they were waiting for all the ducks to be lined up.

reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

Who can forget this gem from Bush?

George Bush Takes Questions After Meeting With 9/11 Commission

Theres a small newspaper snippet i just love to drag out when ever those three little letters are spoken. - C.I.A.


What happened on 9/11 was predicted in the early 60's when the company refused to play by the rules in Vietnam...

reply to post by Swills


Yes Swills...that's the main problem here...

Even if we forget the Inside Job thing...there was negligence abundant...and some high heads should have rolled. But instead, nobody was to blame...even though about a thousand people are paid daily to prevent these things with various protocols that were in place even then...which were not followed...due to..."confusion". Protocols are put in place and practiced actually for the very reason...to avoid confusion and cut short the reaction time...both of these thing were sorely missing that day. No matter the protocols.

I think this is why people are suspicious...and yell Inside job !!! Because if I f*** up at work I get fired...and nobody even got fired for 9/11. And let's not forget...If I f*** up...only a certain web app will stop working...in this instance...3000 people died...at least.

Rosinitiate

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by MarioOnTheFly

 

They had that sitting there waiting patiently for nature to take it's course.

You can't possibly believe that.

If these scumbags wrote up the Patriot Act before 911, rest assured they weren't waiting for "nature" they were waiting for all the ducks to be lined up.

I believe that a whole lot quicker than I'll ever believe hundreds or thousands of military members, hundreds or thousands in law enforcement and hundreds if not thousands in peripheral industry in a place to know better *ALL* either actively took part in the events that morning, knowingly took part in it's cover up or are still actively working the agenda today.

That requires so many people, moving parts and perfection to pretend went 100% according to plan, like clockwork, it'd be a first in not just this Government ..but ANY Government to see pulled off that way.

It's a whole lot easier to imagine a rogue element or series of elements that simply chose to let something they saw developing, run where it was going to run if not stopped or interfered with. All that HAD to happen here was a few dozen men to shut down any and all inquiry into what these guys were up to ..while "wishing them well" to complete their attack ...all the while, quite ready to introduce the world to 1984 Part II, 5 minutes after that attack took place.

No risk to Americans that way. No downside if it failed ..and they'd try again the next time ..(as they may well have done, more than once, to think across the 90's) and it's how everything ...all of it..actually does fit.

That's by no means, even for a moment, saying the Official Story works. The Official story assumed Americans would have stopped them, had they known. It never accounts for the idea that the bad guys may have had little guardian angels they neither knew of, or appreciated ..who insured the unthinkable DID happen, almost 100% as planned.

reply to post by andy1972


Yes. Listening to Clarke I got the impression...that he could do nothing about it. Even if you gathered all the evidence in the world...they are above prosecution.