Saturday, March 5, 2011

STRANGER THAN FICTION: An Independent Investigation of the True Culprits Behind 9-11 {Part 4}



{Return to Part 3}
{Return to Part 2}
{Return to Part 1}





WHO PROVIDED THE PROTECTIVE COVER FOR THE 9-11 OPERATION?

On October 26, 1999, the famous golfer Payne Stewart boarded a private Learjet in Florida and left for Texas. Shortly after takeoff, Stewart's jet veered sharply off course and began heading northwest. All contact with air controllers was lost. Within 15 minutes of having gone off course, US fighter jets had already intercepted the jet. Everyone on board was likely dead due to depressurization. These fighter jets were dispatched by NORAD, the branch of the US air force whose job it is to monitor and defend US airspace 24 hours a day. NORAD maintains a huge array of land based radar systems and has fighter jets on alert 24 hours a day so that they can respond to a crisis. The jets escorted the doomed airplane until another group of Air National Guard jets took over the escort mission. Finally, Stewart's jet ran out of fuel a crashed in South Dakota. The quick reaction time and military precision with which NORAD intercepted and escorted Stewart's jet was impressive, and exactly what one would have expected from the greatest military power in world history. (
86)

But on 9-11, the same NORAD which had so effortlessly intercepted Stewart's jet in 1999, was nowhere to be found during that two hour period between the first planes going off course and the last one crashing in a Pennsylvania field. How is it possible that the airspace between Boston and Washington DC, an area which contains the political and economic heart of the nation, was left completely defenseless? The second plane to hit the New York had flown off course without communication for 40 minutes. On its way to New York, it actually flew within a few miles of McGuire Air Force base in New Jersey, after the first tower had already been hit! And how is it possible that Washington DC was left undefended (long after the New York attacks) when Andrews Air Force base is within car driving distance? The air force jets which did finally arrive were too late. Was this due to NORAD's incompetence, or was the order to scramble the fighter jets deliberately delayed so that the terror attacks could take place. Given NORAD's impressive performance in the 1999 Payne Stewart disaster, this would suggest that someone high up in the Air Force establishment may have issued stand down orders to some of our Air Force bases. Remember, the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board is headed by Zionist Richard Perle and his gang of warmongering lackeys. (
87) The civilians on this board wield the power to promote career minded Generals and Admirals. Is it really that hard to believe that a highly placed military leader could have collaborated with the true 9-11 planners?

What makes the Air Force's slow response even more outrageous and suspicious is that previously mentioned Newsweek article which revealed that several Pentagon leaders (Defense Policy Board?) cancelled flight plans for September 11 due to security concerns. (
88) There were other warning signals too which we’re reviewed earlier. In light of all these warnings, why wasn’t NORAD and it's armada of fighters placed on an even higher alert than they already are? There is only one logical answer to these questions: Certain Pentagon leaders were "in on it".

Some high level Intelligence officials around the world have come to the same conclusion. General Hamid Gul, a former Director of Pakistani Intelligence appears to have hit the nail on the head with his analysis:
“The attacks against New York and Washington were Israeli engineered…”

"The attacks started at 8:45, and four flights are diverted from their assigned air space and no Air Force fighter jets scramble until 10:00. Radars are jammed, transponders fail and no IFF - friend or foe identification - challenge. In Pakistan, if there is no response to an IFF, jets are instantly scrambled. This was clearly an inside job. Will this also be hushed up in the investigation, like the Kennedy assassination?" (
89 A)
The German newspaper, Der Tagesspiegel, interviewed Andreas von Bulow, the former head of the parliamentary commission that oversees Germany’s secret services. Von Bulow stated:
“The planning of the attacks was technically and organizationally a master achievement—to hijack four huge airplanes within a few minutes and within one hour, to drive them into their targets, with complicated flight maneuvers,” said von Bülow in the Tagesspiegel interview. “This is unthinkable, without years of support from state intelligence services.” (89 B)
This led the interviewer to call Von Bulow “a conspiracy theorist.” To which Von Bulow responded:

“Yeah, yeah. That’s the ridicule from those who prefer to follow the official, politically correct line,” von Bulow responded. “Even investigative journalists are fed propaganda and disinformation. Anyone who doubts the official line is called crazy.”

“With the help of the horrifying attacks, the Western mass democracies are being subjected to brainwashing. The enemy image of anti-communism doesn’t work anymore; it is to be replaced by peoples of Islamic belief. They are accused of having given birth to suicidal terrorism.”
(
89 C)
Both Hamid Gul and Andreas Von Bulow accuse Israel’s Mossad and elements within the US of being responsible for 9-11. These charges drew this response from George Bush, who said before the United Nations in November of 2001:
"Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th - malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists themselves, away from the guilty." (89 D)
Bush understandably has no tolerance for “conspiracy theories” but too many unanswered questions still arise. Surely the masterminds of the 9-11 operation would have taken the time to learn something about US air defense procedures. They would therefore have realized that hitting New York City with jets hijacked from Boston would have been difficult. New York is about 30 minutes away by airplane and jumbo jets fly very slowly when compared to US fighter jets crack the sound barrier. Even with a 15-20 minute head start, NORAD's jets could have easily intercepted them, especially the second plane, which took a longer route to New York and flew way off course for 40 minutes. Why choose Boston's airport and jeopardize the success of the operation? Wouldn't it be safer to just hijack planes from New York's Kennedy or La Guardia Airports? Or even Newark which is just across the river. Any plane hijacked from either of those three busy airports would have been unstoppable. Even a plane from Philadelphia's Airport would have been much closer to the target than far away Boston.

The planners were no dummies. They must have counted on receiving protective cover and a window of opportunity by someone high up at US Air command. Why else choose Boston? In addition to the protection that the planners were to receive from certain Air Force elements, there is another plausible theory for choosing Boston's Logan Airport as well as United and American Airlines planes. It should be noted that the firm which provides security at Boston's Logan Airport and also Newark Airport, and also works extensively with United and American Airlines, is a company called Huntleigh USA. (
90) Claiming that Huntleigh USA's airport security was grossly negligent on 9-11, family members of some of the victims are suing Huntleigh. (91)

Huntleigh USA had been acquired by ICTS International in 1999. ICTS is controlled by two Israelis; Ezra Harel and Menachem Atzmon. (
92) In short, security at Boston's Logan airport was handled (or mishandled) by an Israeli controlled company. Is there a connection here? Could agents have been infiltrated into Logan Airport under Israeli owned Huntleigh's cover? It's quite possible. In the days following the 9-11 attacks, Israeli security professionals began aggressively marketing themselves in order to gain more airport security jobs. (93) Americans should be grateful to have such wonderful allies who care about our airport security so much!

Could some of the failure of our defense systems be attributed to a cyber attack from computer hackers? Our defense and intelligence systems are very dependent upon technology. A well coordinated attack on these systems may also have contributed to our inability to expose and prevent the attacks. There is one group that has the capability to attack our military computer systems.

In July of 1999, Ha’aretz (Israel) ran a story headlined: “Hackers Using Israeli Net Site to Strike at Pentagon”: Ha’aretz reported:
“An Israeli Internet site is being used by international computer hackers as a base for electronic attacks on US government and military computer systems, according to Pentagon officials who were quoted in a Washington Times report yesterday.”

“According to the Times, the real danger to US national security is the threat posed by foreign intelligence services or governments that could launch electronic warfare against the United States”
(
94)
And look what the US Department of Justice wrote in this 1998 press release:
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The Department of Justice, in conjunction with the FBI, the Air Force Office of Special Investigation, the National Aeronautic and Space Administration and the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, announced today that the Israeli National Police arrested Ehud Tenebaum, an Israeli citizen, for illegally accessing computers belonging to the Israeli and United States governments, as well as hundreds of other commercial and educational systems in the United States and elsewhere. (95)
No doubt about it. Covert elements in Israel have been targeting the US military’s defense systems for some time now. This could very well have been yet another instrument played during the great orchestrated concert of 9-11.



LEFT: BUSH: "LET US NEVER TOLERATE OUTRAGEOUS CONSPIRACY THEORIES."
RIGHT: GENERAL HAMID GUL: "CLEARLY AN INSIDE JOB."




THE CURIOUS COLLAPSE OF THE TWIN TOWERS AND WTC #7

The government/media approved version of events insists that the fires in the World Trade Center burned so hot that they caused steel supports to melt and buckle, thus triggering a total collapse of the towers and also WTC #7 (which was never even hit by a plane!). This is a strange theory for a number of reasons:
1. The architects who designed the World Trade Center designed it to withstand the direct impact and fuel fire of a commercial airline crash. Aaron Swirsky, one of the architects of the WTC described the collapse as "incredible" and "unbelievable." (96) Lee Robertson, the project's structural engineer said: "I designed it for a 707 to hit it. The Boeing 707 has a fuel capacity comparable to the 767." (97)

2. The history of high-rise building fires provides no case histories of buildings collapsing due to steel beams melting from a fire.

3. The total collapse of WTC 1, WTC 2, AND WTC 7 (which was never even hit by a plane!) were all perfectly symmetrical and methodical. The three straight down collapses were all identical in appearance to well engineered, controlled implosions.
A demolition company could not have done it better. Now that we know that all one has to do to bring a tall building straight down is set a fuel fire in it, the well trained experts who work for demolition companies should all be out of a job by now!

Even a layman with no explosives background should be able to see this. But many specialists in the explosives and structural engineering have also made this observation and commented on these inconsistencies. After the WTC collapse, the Vice President of New Mexico Tech, Van Romero, gave an interview to the Albuquerque Journal. He stated plainly that he believed that the WTC collapse was too methodical and that explosive devices must have been placed in key points of both buildings. Romero said:
"It would be difficult for something from the plane to trigger an event like that. It could have been a relatively small amount of explosives placed in strategic points. One of the things that terrorists are noted for is a diversionary attack and a secondary device." (98)
In that same interview, Romero revealed that he was in Washington DC when the attacks took place. He and a colleague were there to discuss defense research programs for New Mexico Tech. A few days after his interview, Romero abruptly changed his opinion and told the Albuquerque Journal that he no longer believed that bombs brought down the towers. (99) Romero, who relies upon the Zionist occupied Pentagon for funding, hadsuddenly flip-flopped and joined the "melted steel" theorists.

There is more than just my own common sense and Romero's expert opinion to support the belief that the towers were imploded from within. Several witnesses and survivors reported hearing bombs going off inside the World Trade Center. Louie Cacchioli is a firefighter with Engine 47 in Harlem, New York. Cacchioli told People Magazine the following:
"I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there were bombs set in the building." (100)
Now this whole controversy between the "melted steel" scenario and the detonation scenario is one that could be very easily resolved. All we have to do is dig up the steel beams and examine each and everyone of them. If an explosive device caused the steel to fail, there will be tell-tale indications for the engineers to see. But if it was intense heat that caused the steel to "melt" or “buckle“, there will be tell-tale signs of that as well. All we have to do to put an end to this controversy is to closely examine the steel. Right?

Well, don't hold your breath. That's never going to happen. Thanks in large part to Time Magazine's "Person of the Year 2001", New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, the steel beams were quickly recycled before investigators even had the chance to look at them! A media darling and lifelong supporter of Israel, Saint Rudy Giuliani made sure that all of the "smoking gun" evidence was destroyed and right quick too. Much of the steel was recycled in America, but an additional seventy thousand tons of WTC steel was sold to Metals Management - a New York company with a jewish (Zionist?) president named Alan Ratner. Ratner then turned around and shipped the WTC’s steel to China and India for recycling! (
101)

China Radio International’s English Edition also reported:
“New York's Metals Management is among the firms taking steel from the huge project to clear Ground Zero. The company says it has bought 70,000 tons of scrap from the ruined twin towers. Some of the scrap has been shipped across the Pacific to Asian, including China and India. Among the consignments of scrap are the "very dense" steel girders from Ground Zero, which could finally yield 250,000 to 400,000 tons of scrap for recycling.” (102) (emphasis added)
Imagine that! The largest criminal investigation in history and the investigators weren't even permitted to see the most important evidence of all - the steel! During the whole time that Saint Rudy the Recycler and Ratner the Rat were destroying evidence, many of the most respected engineers in the country openly complained not only about the recycling, but also about the Federal government's suffocating control of their investigation.

On December 25, 2001, the New York Times ran a story about the frustrations of some of the engineers who were called in to study the cause of the collapse:
“Interviews with a handful of members of the team, which includes some of the nation's most respected engineers, also uncovered complaints that they had at various times been shackled with bureaucratic restrictions that prevented them from interviewing witnesses, examining the disaster site and requesting crucial information like recorded distress calls to the police and fire departments..." (103)
They made their concerns known publicly. Bill Manning, editor of the 125 year old Fire Engineering magazine, noticed a strange difference between the WTC investigation and other major fire investigations in New York City’s past. Manning wrote:
"Did they throw away the locked doors from the Triangle Shirtwaist fire? Did they throw away the gas can used at the happy land social club fire?...That's what they're doing at the World Trade Center. The destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately." (104)
One investigator told the New York Times:
"This is almost the dream team of engineers in the country working on this, and our hands are tied," said one team member who asked not to be identified. Members have been threatened with dismissal for speaking to the press. "FEMA is controlling everything," the team member said. (105)
Dr. Frederick W. Mowrer from the Fire Engineering department at the University of Maryland told the New York Times:
"I find the speed with which important evidence has been removed and recycled to be appalling." (106)
Finally, the Times story made this interesting little revelation about St. Rudy the Recycler:
Officials in the mayor's office declined to reply to written and oral requests for comment over a three- day period about who decided to recycle the steel and the concern that the decision might be handicapping the investigation.. (107)
It is a very odd form of science that the government and some of its house scientists practice these days. Without a shred of physical evidence, these modern-day alchemists have been able to "prove" their theory fire caused the towers to collapse. This appears to be yet another monstrous lie. Why else would you destroy the "melted steel"? Ask Rudy.



LEFT; EXPLOSIVES EXPERT VAN ROMERO: "THE COLLAPSE WAS TOO METHODICAL."
RIGHT: SAINT RUDY THE RECYCLER AT A PRO-ISRAEL RALLY. HE WAS ALSO NAMED "MAN OF THE YEAR" BY ZIONIST CONTROLLED TIME MAGAZINE.





{Return to Part 3}
{Return to Part 2}
{Return to Part 1}
{Go to Part 5}

No comments:

Post a Comment