AfterMath:Unanswered Questions From 9/11(TEXT)

[2-0-Sixx]

Video Transcript
We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty.
- Edward R. Murrow
George Soros, billionaire philanthropist, addressed students and faculty at
the University of Pennsylvania on April 8, 2002.
“I find the foreign policy of the Bush administration exceedingly
dangerous.
Although the terrorist threat is real and we must defend against it, we
are going about it the wrong way. And what makes the situation so
dangerous, is that nobody dares to say so.
The nation is in danger, therefore it is unpatriotic to criticize our
leader.
That is not what has made this country great. The strength of this
country lies in the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and
the Freedom of Speech and thought…”
V/O: In the weeks leading up to the one-year anniversary of 9/11, GNN
approached nine people who have dedicated themselves to investigating how
and why the United States was attacked that September day.
We asked them 11 questions.

Unanswered Question # 1:

To what extent should airlines have been prepared for 9/11?
Mary Schiavo is representing families of passengers of hijacked 9/11 planes
in lawsuits against United and American Airlines.
What was really interesting is what people thought… what the
government told people and how the government acted versus the real
facts.”
Cut to Mary at Press Conference:
First of all the question is not what they should have known? And I
believe that I can show you in just a few seconds - the question is
what did they know?
And believe me, they knew a lot.
Because on a September day, four planes were hijacked in an Islamic
jihad…
It shocked the world and will forever change the law under which we
act.
You think I am talking about September 11…
I am not.
I am talking about September 12, 1970.
Yes, we had an Islamic jihad: four airplanes were hijacked- actually it
was supposed to be five. They were taken to Jordan. They were
blown up on September 12, 1970.
So in the wake of September 11, 2001 when we heard carriers and
governments alike saying no one could have foreseen this, no one
knew that this was coming, no one knew that there were any risks like
this in the world - is absolutely false… Why? Because we know that
aviation is an industry which criminals go after, terrorists seek, and
hijackers prey upon to make their political statements in the world.
We know this!
So 9/11 was literally a repeat of a fact and an event that had occurred
thirty years earlier in history.
V/O: The Bush administration has changed its official story about how
prepared it was for the threat of terrorism around September 11.

Unanswered Question # 2:

What did the Bush administration know and when?
Mike Ruppert’s From the Wilderness was one of the first independent news
sources to raise the issue of government foreknowledge.
First of all, it is imperative to note that the Bush administration is
absolutely and totally lying when it says, “Golly gee, we had no idea
that aircraft could be used as weapons of mass destruction to attack
the United States.”
We know of course that Bush had clear briefings that al-Qaeda might
be hijacking airplanes but the press forgot to tell you that on October
24-26 of 2000, the Pentagon held detailed drills practicing for an
airliner being crashed into the Pentagon.
The major media didn’t tell you that at the G-8 summit in Genoa, Italy
in July of 2001, just two months before the attacks, all the airspace
was closed off, the summit conference area was ringed with antiaircraft
guns and the LA Times reported clearly that Egyptian
Intelligence and other Intelligence services were afraid that hijacked
aircraft would be crashed into the G-8 summit to kill President Bush.
It’s a total lie that the administration had no knowledge.
It’s also a lie that the administration had no advanced warnings of the
attacks. Intelligence reports from France, from Germany, from Russia,
from Egypt and from Jordan - all of which taken together, show clearly
that the US government had been warned that in the week of
September 9, commercial airliners would be hijacked and crashed into
the World Trade Center, that one of those airplanes would probably
come from an airport in Boston, and that ultimately, through other
warnings, that they would involve aircraft from American and United
Airlines - and that’s just what we know now to this day.
V/O: The FAA, NORAD and the US military have Standard Operating
Procedures that are routinely deployed during hijackings.

Unanswered Question # 3:

Why wasn’t the US military able to intercept the hijacked planes?
Nafeez Ahmed’s book, The War on Freedom, is one of the most detailed
investigations of 9/11.
Standard Operating Procedures dictate that as soon as a plane flies off
course, the FAA will contact the plane and try to ask them what is
going on. If there is a problem or if they cannot establish radio
contact, then immediately the FAA will contact the Pentagon who will,
within a matter of minutes (a maximum of 10 minutes normally), will
scramble fighter jets to intercept the civilian plane and to analyze the
situation to see what is going on.
V/O: In his book, Nafeez documents a timeline of September 11, showing
how the attacks should have been prevented, intercepted, or terminated.
V/O: In the case of American Airlines Flight 77, which departed Dulles and
was crashed into the Pentagon, the FAA lost contact at 8:50 AM. However
fighters were not scrambled until 9:24 AM… a delay of over 30 minutes.
Now this sort of direct violation of Standard Operating Procedures is
inconceivable without some kind of high-level government reproval.
If we try to explain it by using the incompetence theory, it doesn’t
make sense. For example, if it was incompetence, we would expect
that there would have been a normal inquiry into what went wrong.
We would have expected that there would be some kind of
reprimands, that certain officials would be downgraded, or they would
lose their jobs, or something would have happened to correct the
situation.
But we find that there have been no such reprimands at all.

Unanswered Question # 4:

How did the administration respond to the failures of the military and
Intelligence agencies on 9/11?
David McMichael is an ex-CIA analyst and former editor of Unclassified, the
magazine of the Association of National Security Alumni.
Contrary to the situation in countries with parliamentary governments
where the responsible cabinet officer following a disaster of any sort is
expected to (and almost always does) resign or fall on his sword or
something like that, in the United States that simply does not happen.
That is not our tradition.
V/O: Despite the breakdown under his acting leadership on September 11,
General Richard B. Myers was promoted to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff - the highest military post in the country.
The worse the failure of Intelligence, the more the Intelligence system
gets rewarded in terms of greater budgets and more personnel on the
grounds of course that they failed because the didn’t have the
resources.
Well that is often done on the military side as well: a sufficient
military failure will usually bring on demands not so much for the
sacking of the generals who participated in the failure, but in
increasing their budgets so that arguably, it won’t happen again.
V/O: In his 2003 budget, President Bush proposed an allocation of $396
billion for national defense: an increase of $48 billion over 2002 - the largest
single increase in military spending since the height of the Vietnam War.

Unanswered Question #5:

What ties, if any, did the US government and Intelligence agencies have with
the terrorists or their supporters?
Michel Chossudovsky’s research at the Centre for Research on
Globalization has exposed links between the Bush administration and the
terrorists.
It’s well documented that the Taliban was supported by the Clinton
administration. They would not have formed a government had it not
been for US military aid, which was channeled through Pakistan’s Inter
Services Intelligence. And that same organization supports the
development of these terrorist organizations.
V/O: During the Soviet-Afghani war of the 1980s, Pakistan’s Inter Services
Intelligence agency served as the critical link between the CIA and frontline
rebel groups, one of which was Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda network.
The al-Qaeda network is considered by the CIA to be an intelligence
asset, and intelligence assets are controlled by their sponsors. That
does not of course mean that al-Qaeda is necessarily pro-American. It
means that al-Qaeda is being used to perform certain functions for the
US intelligence apparatus, and it goes through a whole complex group
of intermediaries. And that’s why Pakistan’s military Intelligence has
played a very important role in that context. It’s important to
understand the man who, according to the FBI, is considered to be the
so-called money-man behind the 9/11 terrorists - and I am talking
about the head of Pakistan’s military Intelligence, Mahmoud Ahmed.
V/O: In the aftermath of 9/11, the FBI confirmed that General Ahmed, then
head of Pakistan’s ISI, had authorized a $100,000 wire transfer to Mohamed
Atta, the alleged ring-leader of the terrorist hijackers.
But this same individual was on an official visit to Washington DC from
the 4-13 of September and he met Colin Powell, Richard Armitage,
George Tenet, his counterpart… Now the question you have to ask
yourself is: if the money man behind 9/11 is in Washington meeting
top officials, and at the same time, sending money to the terrorists,
doesn’t it sound… what is the proximity group of this individual from a
sociological point of view, ok?

 

[2-0-Sixx]

He has links with the terrorists, he has links with the Bush
administration. He is buddy-buddy with George Tenet, he is buddybuddy
with Mohamed Atta.
Does that not suggest that senior Bush officials should at least give us
some answers of what they were doing with this guy?

Unanswered Question # 6:

Were there plans for a war in central Asia prior to September 11?
[Mike Ruppert]
This war was coming for a long time. Zbigniew Brzezinski who had
been Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor, who also worked in
Intelligence roles for Presidents Reagan and Bush I, was co-founder of
the Trilateral Commission… he wrote a book in 1997 called The Grand
Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geo-Strategic Imperatives, and
in three specific places in that book, he says that the key to America’s
control of the world in the 21st Century is the control of Eurasia.
V/O: In support of his thesis, Brzezinski states, “A power that dominates
Eurasia would control two of the world’s three most advanced and
economically productive regions and about thee-fourths of the world’s known
energy resources.”
Then he says that without an attack on the order of Pearl Harbor or
without a direct external threat, there was no way that the American
people would support the imperial mobilization necessary to control
central Asia.
And in this book - again written in 1997 - Brzezinski had a map of
where the next world conflict was going to be and you look at this map
in the book and it is exactly where we are fighting now.

Unanswered Question # 7:

Is there an underlying motive, besides the War on Terror, for the US military
presence in Central Asia?
Peter Dale Scott has written extensively about hidden agendas in US
foreign policy.
There are people in the administration who believe out and out that
this is the American century, that it is the time of American
hegemony… Both Republicans and Democrats have said we shouldn’t
worry so much about what our allies think.
V/O: Despite a lack of support from America’s traditional allies, the Bush
administration continues to pursue military action in Central Asia.
But I think it’s pretty clear now to everybody that America has an oil
geo-strategy in that part of the world.
V/O: The US National Energy Policy Report of 2001, authored by Vice
President Dick Cheney, formerly one of America’s richest and most powerful
oil industry executives, demanded a priority on US access to Persian oil
supplies.
America needs to control the world oil system. And the fact that we
have put US troops in Georgia, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, even in
Kyrgyzstan, 200 miles form the west Chinese border… All of those
troops there are nominally in the name of fighting the terrorists. But
in reality, they have established an American presence in the great oil
basin of the Caspian.
And people more and more are admitting that America is a serious
player in that area because of the troops we have put in…
V/O: On October 6, 2002, the UK Observer reported, “The Bush
administration, intimately entwined with the global oil industry, is keen to
pounce on Iraq’s massive untapped reserves, the second biggest in the world
after Saudi Arabia’s.”

Unanswered Question # 8:

Is there any historical evidence to suggest that the government may have
used the 9/11 attacks to justify its war in Central Asia?
Alex Jones is a television and radio broadcaster who has publicly questioned
the Bush administration’s version of what happened on September 11.
Governments always get caught engaging in terrorist attacks against
their own populations to rally them for war or for domestic crackdown.
We saw William McKinley’s Navy in the 1890s blowing up their own
ship in Havana Harbor as a pretext for war with the Spanish
government. And that’s now admitted fact.
We saw Adolf Hitler blow up his own Reichstag as a pretext for martial
law… They firebombed their own capital! Nazi documents have been
released that are now part of historical record!
Then of course we saw December 7, with the Japanese attacking Pearl
Harbor. It’s now been released that 12 days before, they had Admiral
Yamamoto’s communiqué that the Japanese were going to be
attacking Pearl Harbor.
One of the best examples we have of the US government planning
terrorist attacks against its own institutions is the Northwoods
Document. This is a confirmed admitted document declassified just a
few years ago.
V/O: In Body of Secrets, his best selling expose of the National Security
Agency, author James Bamford revealed that Operation Northwoods called
for: innocent people to be shot on American streets, for a wave of violent
terrorism to be launched in Washington DC, and for a US ship to be blown up
in Guantanamo Bay - all in an effort to galvanize American public support for
a war against Cuba.
And they say in the Northwoods Document: “Casualty lists in US
newspapers would cause a helpful wave of indignation.” We certainly
saw a helpful wave of indignation after September 11!

Unanswered Question #9:

How has the government’s reaction to the terrorist attacks impacted the rule
of law in the United States?
John Judge is a member of the Washington Peace Center and has
researched the post 9-11 effects on U.S. civil liberties.
As of Sept. the 11th the entire country went into ‘Continuity of
Government’, which is a special government which does not rely on
the elected representatives but in fact puts a small group of people in
power. When you go into a declared war, or a state of national
emergency, which is what they went into Sept 11th, legal authorities
change. Hundreds of laws allow new power and new authorities for a
select few people. Decisions are made not by the overt government,
but by now an acknowledged ‘shadow government’. That’s who’s
making these decisions, is D.O.D, FEMA, and the NSA. That’s who’s
running the country since Sept 11th.
They’re not making it very visible, but they’ve studied
conventional explosives and weapons, chemical and biological
weapons, and nuclear weapons as a three stage approach to terrorism
and counter-terrorism and at each of those levels, they laid out maps
that would take away more and more of the civil liberties. Eventually,
when you go to martial law or into these emergency situations, they
can set up detention camps, and go into certain neighborhoods and
round people up. The highway system, the phone system,
communications, mass media, mail… all come under Offices of
Emergency Preparedness and military control, once you go into these
scenarios.

Unanswered question #10:

How has recent legislation, like the patriot act and homeland security bill
affected the lives of American people?
Riva Enteen is an executive director of the National Lawyers Guild.
One of the greatest ironies along with the tragedy of the patriot
act is that it’s called ‘patriot’. In fact, it is patriotic to defend the
constitution, and what the patriot act does is dismantle the
constitution.
V/O: In October, 2001, the USA patriot act was passed into law, granting
unprecedented levels of power to the Justice Department.
The greatest thing it did was it created a new federal crime of
‘domestic terrorism’.
V/O: Under the patriot at, a definition of domestic terrorism is:
… activities that involve acts dangerous to human life, that violate the laws of
the US or any state and appear to be intended to influence the policy of
government by intimidation or coercion.

 

[2-0-Sixx]

That’s domestic terrorism. Now intimidation and coercion are
very mild words when you think about it. What about people going
out on strike? What about Rosa Parks, sitting in the front of the bus?
What about those sit-ins at the lunch counters? Those are all intended
to intimidate or coerce government institutions, and if somebody had
the possibility of being injured as a result, that would have been
domestic terrorism. Martin Luther King would have been a domestic
terrorist.
In addition to this new federal crime of domestic terrorism,
some of the aspects that are quite troubling, include this ‘sneak and
peek’ provision so now the police can go into your house and search
your house without a warrant if you’re not there.
They also have this roving wiretap provision. Where it used to
be they would have to get a warrant for your particular phone and now
the warrant applies any phone you might touch. That could be your
mothers phone, your friends phone, any phone you might touch is
subject to a wiretap.
V/O: Also in the patriot act, is the new designation of civilians as “enemy
combatants”.
Citizens deemed ‘enemy combatants’, can be held indefinitely,
with no charges against them, no right to see an attorney, no right to
go before a judge. And this category of ‘enemy combatant’ isn’t even
defined, so at this point, anyone who is suspect can be denied all due
process rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
The Homeland Security Act, which passed about a year later in
Nov 2002, outlines in great detail the degree to which the government
can now spy, listen in, record, get access to… internet, library cards,
bookstore records, medical records, school records, phone
conversations. The patriot act did some of this, the homeland security
expands it… so that there’s really no area of our lives that is free from
government intrusion.

Unanswered question #11:

In conclusion, we asked our interviewees: What are your final thoughts, and
what can we do?

Mike Ruppert

On Sept 11th, 4 commercial airliners were hijacked, 2 of them were
crashed into the WTC buildings in Manhattan, in New York. One was crashed
in Pennsylvania, and another was crashed into the Pentagon. This set off a
‘crossing the rubicon’ of human existence, a change in our lifestyle, a change
in human civilization, which people are just beginning to understand about a
year after the fact. That was a day that changed all of our lives forever, in
ways that we’re just beginning to see. But the run up to Sept. 11th, the
historical context in which it occurred, is a much darker, a much deeper
political and economic story, that cannot be explained away by the trite,
simplistic explanations given by the administration or the news media.

John Judge

Well, I don’t think we yet know what happened on Sept. the 11th. But
we are being presented, in the same way as we always are, with a world that
we know nothing about, with people, supposedly, we’re told, hate us for
reasons we can’t comprehend. We’re being told, for instance, that the
reason that they bombed the trade towers and the pentagon, is that they
hate us because we’re a democracy. Because we’re a pluralist society.
Because we have an open society, and they can’t stand that. Or because
we’re large and have a great deal of wealth. Well, if that’s the case, then
why aren’t they bombing Canada? Canada is a pluralist, large society… but it
has a much different foreign policy, doesn’t it? And so what’s happened is
that the American people, separated from their own history, have no idea
what has been done in their name, all around the world, in those intervening
50 years since the end of WW II.

David McMichael

It was Mussolini who said it, and not only him.. not only he, that ‘war
is the health of the state’. In other words, in time of war, the people who
govern, are given, typically, almost free reign to do as they wish, without
much question. All people who govern- and George Bush has said it on at
least 2 occasions… ‘it would be so much easier if I were a dictator’… I
paraphrase closely. This is what the people who govern want. No one in a
position of power wishes to be restrained by such things as law, or
constitutions, or public opinion. A simple examination of history through a
political science lens will tell you that. So yes, people seize these
opportunities and run with them.

Nafeez Ahmed

Just after the Sept 11th, there was a great deal of sympathy, from
Europe, from Russia, from everyone. And at that time, the Bush
administration was able to pursue a variety of international policies which
had previously been vehemently rejected by it’s allies.
What’s happening now is that as the United States continues the war
on terror, including the upcoming imminent invasion of Iraq, threats against
Saudi Arabia, threats against Iran, threats against many, many countries
around the world which happen to be of strategic interest to the United
States. The U.S. allies have grown increasingly worried about US policy,
which is basically very unilateral, and is based on a lack of consultation with
its allies. So I think public opinion is now beginning to go back to the pre
Sept 11th stage, of hostility towards US policy.

Peter Dale Scott

I’d like to quote John Adams, who I think hit the nail on the head, he
said, ‘it’s the established order of things that whenever a nation rises to such
a height of power that it loses its wisdom and moderation, it will, in the end,
also lose its power. Which will come back when its sense of moderation
returns.
Now he was talking about Great Britain, but what was true of Britain
then, and I think he was absolutely right, and it was true of Napoleon, who
went crazy, thought he could march into the heart of Russia, the heart of
Asia and it was a disaster. Hitler thought he could march into the heart of
Asia.. it was a disaster. We are about to march into the heart of Asia,
apparently, and if we do, and it’s not clear that we will, but if we did, I think
that it would be seen 100 years from now as the beginning of the decline of
American hegemony.
Michel Chossudovsky
One year later, in the aftermath of Sept 11th, the Bush administration
is waging a war in Iraq, in Palestine, in Afghanistan, it’s a war without
borders. It’s a war of conquest, in response to economic and strategic
considerations and it has nothing to do with the war on terrorism. Within the
United States, fundamental freedoms have been rescinded, through the
patriot act. Fundamental rights of free expression are being, again, also
rescinded. People are being arrested arbitrarily, for presumed links to the
terrorists. When, in fact, the people who have ordered the arrests
themselves have links to the terrorists. That’s the question we have to ask…
and that’s what defines the criminalization of a state. It’s when war criminals
call the shots and decide who are criminals.
Mary Schiavo
Years from now, when people analyze what happened in the wake of
9-11, it will be a very, very dark day in the history of American legislation,
and legal history. Because for the government to rush to protect
corporations, foreign corporations, and airlines, and negligent wrongdoers,
against dead and dying and injured Americans, it will be a very dark day.
And they were willing to strip them of their legal rights to do so… shocking.
And to do that in retrospect, to harm them in hindsight because of what the
government and the airlines failed to do, it will be a very dark day in
American legal history. And probably worst of all is the realization, and
many senators have now admitted it, that they were contacted by lobbyists
seeking a bailout and immunity for the negligent, not on Sept 12, or 13, or
14. On Sept 11th. The lobbying started. While the bodies were still burning,
congress was crafting protections for the negligent against the burning and
dead.

Riva Enteen

Dissent has never been more critical for us to engage in, with all of the
energy and all of the commitment that we can muster. Because without
these voices of dissent, we will not be the full society that we cherish, and
the government is taking us on an illegal path. It is our voices that must
demand that they follow the constitution and follow the law. When people
say what we should be doing… people need to mobilize at the local level, at
the grassroots level. There are now about 30 municipalities around the
country that have passed resolutions to demand repeal of the patriot act, it’s
a very good thing for people to do. People are also negotiating at the local
level with their local law enforcement, that local law enforcement should not
cooperate with federal law enforcement in terms of INS, or the Department
of Justice, the FBI… People need to encourage people to speak out,
encourage their local governments to speak out.

Alex Jones

As this system squeezes more and more people, as it begins to
dominate more and more people, and displace more and more people, folks
are going to be looking for answers. You need to be educated to be leaders
in your area, to give them those answers in how we can rebuild our society
on decency and honor, and things that have really made societies work in the
past.
We’ve got to start honoring creativity, honoring individuality, and not
this mass-marketed, slave hell that they’ve created. Now is the time to fight
this dehumanization. Now is the time to realize you’re special and you have
power, and you can effect change. And that we’re in a war for the very
future of humanity. It’s that important. You’re a soldier on the front lines.
So get out there, and take it back to them. 110%. You don’t have a choice,
ladies and gentlemen, run your own life, or someone else is going to run it
for you.

 

[2-0-Sixx]

Because on a September day, four planes were hijacked in an Islamic jihad…It shocked the world and will forever change the law under which we act. You think I am talking about September 11…I am not. I am talking about September 12, 1970.

 

[2-0-Sixx]

:dead:

 

[2-0-Sixx]

:devious: read:devious:

 

[miggidy]

Hey 2-0,

You want some insider info?
It's classified info and I won't reveal my source but you ever wonder why the attacks were only focussed on the East coast?

The west coast was on the list too. But the fucking hi-jackers got their pacific and eastern times mixed up.
They booked their flights at the same time,
8:00 am eastern and pacific. By the time it was 8:00 am over here, all airports were shut down.
A stupid mistake saved the lives of many Americans.

This info was found in the days after 911, the FBI ain't releasing any of this info. But they made a few arrests in the east bay and found tons of info on the would be hi-jackers.