From: "Harold Helm"
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 19:52:52 -0500
Subject: C-SPAN to Broadcast 9/11 Cover-up This Weekend; Scholarly Journal Publishes Excellent 9/11 Article

Plain Text Attachment

From: "WantToKnow.info" C-SPAN to Broadcast
9/11 Cover-up This Weekend; Scholarly Journal Publishes Excellent
9/11 Article
" A Zogby poll in late August 2004 found 49 per cent of New York City
residents and 41 per cent of New York citizens overall agreed that
'some leaders in the U.S. government knew in advance that attacks
were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they
consciously failed to take action.' Stanley Hilton -- a former aide
to Senator Bob Dole -- has filed a $7 billion suit on behalf of the
families of 14 victims of the 9/11 attacks, alleging that Bush, along
with Cheney, Rumsfeld and others, actually ordered 9/11 to happen for
political gain. Hilton says he has incriminating documents and
witnesses showing this."

-- Journal of Psychohistory, Winter 2005 Issue

Below is a shortened version of the best single article discussing
what really happened on 9/11 that I have come across. Published in
the scholarly Journal of Psychohistory, this engaging article
presents a very clear, well reasoned argument supporting the need for
a truly independent citizen commission to explore the multitude of
strange and unexplained facts around 9/11. A total of 74 footnotes
(included below) back up the claims made in this thoroughly
researched article. For lots more on this important topic, visit our
9/11 Information Center athttp://www.wanttoknow.info/911information

C-SPAN is the first major media source to provide serious coverage of
the 9/11 cover-up. An excellent university lecture by renowned
theologian Dr. David Ray Griffin revealing disturbing 9/11 facts was
aired two consecutive weekends back in May. Now, this Saturday at
8:00 PM and Sunday at 1:00 PM (Eastern time), C-SPAN 2 (Book TV)
features one of the foremost researchers on 9/11, Nafeez Ahmed,
author of two of the best books on 9/11. For C-SPAN's weekend
schedule, click here. For their program description, click here. By
informing ourselves and spreading the word, we can build a brighter
future.

With best wishes,
Fred Burks for the WantToKnow.info Team

www.911truth.org
(excellent 9/11 website)

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and 9/11:
A Scandal Beyond What Has Been Seen Before

By Matt Everett
The Journal of Psychohistory Volume 32, No. 3
Winter 2005

If what I say is right, the whole US government should end up behind
bars. -- Andreas von B?low, former German government minister and
author of "The CIA and September 11th"

At the beginning of the invasion of Iraq in March 2003, U.S. Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld promised: "What will follow will not be a
repeat of any other conflict. It will be of a force and scope and
scale that has been beyond what has been seen before." The invasion
that ensued was, like all wars, destructive and resulted in the loss
of thousands of lives. Yet Baghdad fell in a mere three weeks and
just six weeks after the invasion commenced, President Bush
announced: "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended." Despite the
death and destruction, it was hardly a war of a 'force,' 'scope' and
'scale' beyond what had been seen before.

However, before it began, there were indications that some people
wanted a far more destructive war than that which ensued. For
example,ridiculous as it may now sound, it was suggested that Britain
and America might use nuclear weapons against Iraq. As The
Guardianreported at the time:

"From last year's US defence review and the testimony of the Defence
Secretary, Geoffrey Hoon, to the defence select committee last March
it was clear that a major change in the US and UK nuclear policy was
taking place. For the first time Britain and America were
contemplating using nuclear weapons against an enemy using only
chemical or biological weapons. Referring to 'states of concern', and
Saddam Hussein in particular, Mr Hoon told the committee: 'They can
be absolutely confident that in the right conditions we would be
willing to use our nuclear weapons.'" 1

A month before the invasion, Hoon repeated his warning: "Saddam can
be absolutely confident that in the right conditions we would be
willing to use nuclear weapons." 2 As investigative journalist John
Pilger points out: "No British minister has ever made such an
outright threat." 3

Thankfully, the invasion passed without our resorting to nuclear
weapons. But it seemed the desire for a bigger conflict remained,
with attempts beginning almost immediately to find a new, more
formidable enemy. In particular, Iran and Syria seemed next on the
list for 'liberation.' At a press conference in July 2003, President
Bush issued a stern warning to both countries, accusing them of
harboring terrorists. "This behaviour is completely unacceptable," he
said, "and states that continue to harbour terrorists will be held
completely accountable." 4 Three months later, U.S. Under Secretary
of State for Arms Control John Bolton told journalists: "There is
awareness of the threat posed by Iran and consensus that threat has
to be eliminated." 5 Yet these warnings failed to capture much public
interest.

Instead, there was a growing interest around the investigation into
the attacks of September 11, 2001. Previously, the press had largely
ignored the work of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon
the United States, better known as the "9-11 Commission." When it
held its second public hearings in May 2003 on the key issue of air
defense, the New York Times and Los Angeles Times failed to write any
articles about it. 6 Suddenly though, in March 2004 the Commission
became the center of attention when former White House security
expert Richard Clarke publicly testified before it and criticized the
Bush administration for failing to address terrorism when it first
came into office.

Since then, the 9/11 Commission remained a major news story and the
book of its final report became an instant bestseller. However, the
mass media were still overlooking the fact that increasing numbers of
people were seriously questioning the entire official account of
9/11. More and more books had been released around the world giving
evidence of possible U.S. government complicity in the attacks. Polls
suggested that millions of people were suspicious: A Zogby poll in
late August 2004 found 49 per cent of New York City residents and 41
per cent of New York citizens overall agreed that "some leaders in
the U.S. Government knew in advance that attacks were planned on or
around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to take
action." 7 A survey three months earlier found 63 per cent of
Canadians believed the U.S. Government had "prior knowledge of the
plans for the events of September 11th, and failed to take
appropriate action to stop them." 8 A July 2003 poll had found almost
a fifth of Germans believed the U.S. Government, or elements within
it, were responsible for organizing the attacks. 9

With attempts at identifying a new 'external enemy' so far failing, I
believe it is possible that, instead, this growing suspicion around
9/11 will develop into an unprecedented public scandal. But what are
these suspicions about? Are they simply the result of rumour and
'urban legend,' or could some of the disturbing allegations now being
made be found true in future? In this article, I will examine some of
the arguments put forward by 9/11 skeptics, along with supporting
evidence. Then I will examine some of the psychohistorical evidence
that shows why we could be heading for a major scandal over the
events of 9/11. Until the controversy around 9/11 is brought into the
open and investigated properly, it is up to individuals to draw their
own conclusions. However, in my opinion, the volume of evidence now
gathered is enough to suggest a massive scandal is a real
possibility. The implications of this would be extraordinary. As one
of the most prominent 9/11 skeptics, former German government
minister Andreas von B?low, says: "If what I say is right, the whole
US government should end up behind bars." 10

DONALD RUMSFELD ON 9/11

As U.S. secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld was on 9/11 second in
the military chain-of-command behind the president. Yet details of
what he did during the attacks are sketchy and from what we currently
know, he did nothing in response to the crisis until it was too late
to make a difference.

According to Rumsfeld, on the morning of September 11 he was hosting
a breakfast meeting at the Pentagon for some members of Congress. He
told them that "sometime in the next two, four, six, eight, ten,
twelve months there would be an event that would occur in the world
that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again
how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department." 11
Soon after, someone walked in and gave him a note saying a plane had
hit the World Trade Center. Yet Rumsfeld apparently was not moved to
take action. "e adjourned the meeting, and I went in to get my CIA
briefing," he has said. 12 Whilst in his office with the CIA briefer,
Rumsfeld says he was told of the second plane hitting the WTC. Yet he
went ahead with a meeting in his private dining room at the Pentagon
with his deputy, Paul Wolfowitz and U.S. Representative Christopher
Cox, to discuss how to win votes for Bush's defense plan.

During this meeting, Rumsfeld was apparently oblivious to the fact
that an airplane was heading towards Washington. However, he made
another prediction: "let me tell you, I've been around the block a
few times," he told Representative Cox. "There will be another
event." For emphasis, he repeated: "There will be another event." 13
Just minutes later the Pentagon was hit. Rumsfeld says: "I went
outside to determine what had happened. I was not there long because
I was back in the Pentagon with a crisis action team shortly before
or after 10:00 a.m. On my return from the crash site and before going
to the executive support center, I had one or more calls in my
office, one of which was with the president." 14 Rumsfeld didn't
enter the National Military Command Center within the Pentagon though
until 10.30. Brigadier General Montague Winfield says: "For 30
minutes we couldn't find him. And just as we began to worry, he
walked into the door of the National Military Command Center." 15 As
the 9/11 Commission conclude: "The Secretary of Defense did not enter
the chain of command until the morning's key events were over." 16
Nor is Rumsfeld on the record as having given any orders that morning.

Yet, according to military procedure, if the Federal Aviation
Administration were to notify the National Military Command Center of
a hijacking, with the exception of "immediate responses" the NMCC was
required to "forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of
Defense for approval." 17 Of course, 9/11 would easily come under the
heading of "immediate responses." All the same, Rumsfeld has yet to
be asked whether he was contacted in line with this military
procedure and, if so, what did he do in response?

Interestingly, since 9/11 Donald Rumsfeld has made statements
suggesting why he may have wanted an event like 9/11 to occur. For
example, in a televised interview two years after the attacks, he
described how he thinks about what a senior leader in the Gulf told
him, that maybe 9/11 was "a blessing in disguise," and a "wake-up
call" for the world to deal with the growing threat of terrorism.
Rumsfeld said he agreed with this, that 9/11 was indeed a 'wake-up
call.' 18 He wrote a similar thing in his prepared testimony to the
9/11 Commission:

"Think about what has been done since the September 11th attacks: two
state sponsors of terrorism have been removed from power, a 90-nation
coalition has been formed which is cooperating on a number of levels?
All of these actions are putting pressure on terrorist networks.
Taken together, they represent a collective effort that is
unprecedented -- which has undoubtedly saved lives, and made us safer
than before September 11th. 19

DICK CHENEY ON 9/11

Based upon mainstream accounts, Vice President Cheney's actions
during the attacks appear less suspicious than those of Bush and
Rumsfeld. However, there are some odd contradictions in the reports
of what he did. On the morning of September 11, before learning about
the attacks, Dick Cheney was in his office in the White House.
According to the 9/11 Commission, just before 9 a.m. he was preparing
for a meeting when his assistant "told him to turn on his television
because a plane had struck the North Tower of the World Trade
Center." 20 Cheney subsequently saw the second aircraft hitting the
South Tower. Then, "just before 9:36," the Secret Service ordered the
evacuation of the vice president and agents took him down to the
Presidential Emergency Operations Center, the bunker below the East
Wing of the White House. "The Vice President entered the underground
tunnel leading to the shelter at 9:37." 21

However, according to White House photographer David Bohrer who was
present at the time, this evacuation occurred just after 9 a.m. 22
Furthermore, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta described before
the 9/11 Commission how a young man had come into the PEOC to inform
the vice president of the approach towards Washington of the aircraft
that hit the Pentagon. According to Mineta, this occurred around 9:25
or 9:26. 23 This suggests that the report of Cheney only reaching the
underground tunnel leading to the shelter at 9:37 is incorrect. If
Cheney were in fact evacuated soon after 9, why would it later be
claimed this took place about half an hour later? One possibility is
that it was to make the failure of the Secret Service to evacuate
President Bush from his location that morning appear less suspicious.
(See below.) Alternatively, if Michael Ruppert's allegations about
the vice president's involvement in the attacks are correct, then
this claim could simply be an attempt to conceal his complicity.

Soon after 9:15, Cheney spoke over the phone with the president, who
was at a school in Florida that morning. Also, "sometime before 10:10
to 10:15," he reportedly phoned the president to discuss the rules of
engagement for the combat air patrol above Washington. Supposedly, he
recommended the president authorize the military to shoot down any
civilian airliners that might be under the control of hijackers. Bush
later recalled his response being "You bet." 24 The president also
emphasized in his private meeting with the 9/11 Commission that he
had authorized the shootdown of hijacked aircraft. 25 This is an
important point, because the shooting down of a wayward aircraft
before it crashed into a populated area could save many lives.

Yet, according to the 9/11 Commission, "there is no documentary
evidence for this call." 26 Newsweek adds: "Nor did the real-time
notes taken by two others in the room, Cheney's chief of staff,
'Scooter' Libby -- who is known for his meticulous record-keeping --
or Cheney's wife, Lynne, reflect that such a phone call between Bush
and Cheney occurred or that such a major decision as shooting down a
U.S. airliner was discussed." 27 According to Newsweek, some of the
Commission's staff were highly skeptical of Cheney's account, with
one well-informed source claiming some of them "flat out didn't
believe the call ever took place." 28 All the same, whether or not
Bush authorized him to do so, "by the time Cheney issued his shoot-
down order, between 10:10 and 10:15 a.m., United Flight 93, the last
plane-turned-missile on 9/11, had already crashed in Pennsylvania (at
10:03 a.m.)." 29

Furthermore, it appears that Cheney -- along with Bush -- was
reluctant for 9/11 to be investigated: When then Senate Majority
Leader Tom Daschle appeared on NBC's Meet the Press in May 2002, he
said Cheney had, on January 24 that year, urged him not to
investigate the events of September 11. Daschle added that four days
later Bush made the same request. When the program's moderator Tim
Russert asked: "It wasn't, 'Let's not have a national commission, but
let's have the intelligence committees look into this,' it was 'No
investigation by anyone, period'?" Daschle replied: "That's correct."
He added that the request had been repeated on "other dates
following." 30

GEORGE W. BUSH ON 9/11

September 11, 2001 was the most important day of George W. Bush's
life. As American president he was commander in chief of the U.S
armed forces. His actions were crucial. According to the 9/11
Commission, the only people that day with authority to order the
shooting down of a civilian plane if, say, it were heading towards a
populated area (like the World Trade Center or the Pentagon) were the
president or the secretary of defense. 31 I have already shown that
Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld was apparently 'out of the loop' during
the attacks. What then did Commander in Chief Bush do?

Before examining this question, it is important to recognise that the
U.S. president does not travel alone. He takes with him an entire
staff, including members of the Secret Service, who are responsible
for his safety. The president's travelling entourage have the best
communications equipment in the world. They have contact with, or can
easily reach, the cabinet, the National Military Command Center in
the Pentagon, the FAA and other Secret Service agents. 32 We might
therefore assume George Bush would have been one of the first people
informed of the extraordinary chain of events unfolding on September
11.

Furthermore, Bush's location for that morning was made public four
days previously, on September 7: He would be in Sarasota, Florida, to
"continue his focus on reading and education." 33 We might assume
then that once it was recognised that America was under attack, the
president would have been considered a potential target and immediate
action would have been taken to protect him and ensure the safety of
all around him. Yet, despite the horrifying sequence of events in
progress, Bush continued with his pre-planned visit to the Emma E.
Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, where he listened to a class
full of children reading. He remained at the school until around 9:35
a.m. 34 -- nearly 50 minutes after the first plane hit the WTC and
over half an hour after the second plane hit. Incredibly, the
president's support team, including the Secret Service, allowed this.

According to Philip Melanson, an expert on the Secret Service, Bush
should have been removed from the school immediately after Flight 175
hit the second WTC tower. Melanson says: "With an unfolding terrorist
attack, the procedure should have been to get the president to the
closest secure location as quickly as possible, which clearly is not
a school. You're safer in that presidential limo, which is bombproof
and blastproof and bulletproof." 35 Furthermore, considering the
president's responsibilities as commander in chief, Melanson adds
that Bush's limousine had key advantages: "In the presidential limo,
the communications system is almost duplicative of the White House --
he can do almost anything from there but he can't do much sitting in
a school." 36

Bush was informed of the second plane hitting the WTC when, around
9:05, his Chief of Staff Andrew Card came across the classroom and
reportedly whispered to him: "A second plane hit the second tower.
America is under attack." 37 According to the 9/11 Commission: "The
President told us his instinct was to project calm, not to have the
country see an excited reaction at a moment of crisis." 38
Furthermore, "The Secret Service told us they were anxious to move
the President to a safer location, but did not think it imperative
for him to run out the door." 39 Yet this inaction could have had
disastrous consequences. In the words of 9/11 researchers Allan Wood
and Paul Thompson: "Why hasn't Bush's security staff been criticized
for their completely inexplicable decision to stay at the school? And
why didn't Bush's concern for the children extend to not making them
and the rest of the 200 or so people at the school terrorist
targets?" 40 As the reporter Gail Sheehy concludes, the final report
of the 9/11 Commission shows that on the morning of September 11,
"the president and the other top officials in charge of the systems
to defend the country from attack were, in essence, missing in
action: They did not communicate, did not coordinate a response to
the catastrophe, and in some cases did not even get involved in
discussions about the attacks until after all of the hijacked planes
had crashed." 41

With the best communications in the world available to him, we might
assume Bush would have been one of the first people informed of the
hijackings and the first plane hitting the WTC. Yet according to
official accounts, he remained oblivious even whilst millions of
people saw what had happened on television. Strangely, there have
been at least seven different accounts of when and from whom Bush
first heard of Flight 11 crashing into the WTC. 42 As Allan Wood and
Paul Thompson note, Bush's own recollections only add to the confusion:

"Less than two months after the attacks, Bush made the preposterous
claim that he had watched the first attack as it happened on live
television?. On December 4, 2001, Bush was asked: "How did you feel
when you heard about the terrorist attack?" Bush replied, "I was
sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane
hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on?. I said, it must have been
a horrible accident." 43
Yet, as Wood and Thompson point out, "There was no film footage of
the first attack until at least the following day." They continue:

"It's doubly strange why his advisors didn't correct him or -- at the
very least -- stop him from repeating the same story only four weeks
later. On January 5, 2002, Bush stated: "Well, I was sitting in a
schoolhouse in Florida?and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all,
when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the
first building. There was a TV set on." 44

On the morning of 9/11, Bush promised that he had "ordered that the
full resources of the federal government go?to conduct a full-scale
investigation to hunt down and to find those folks who committed this
act." 45 Yet it appears more like he has tried to hinder
investigations. As Salon reported in June 2003:

"The White House long opposed the formation of a blue-ribbon Sept. 11
commission, some say, and even now that panel is underfunded and
struggling to build momentum. And, they say, the administration is
suppressing a 900-page congressional study, possibly out of fear that
the findings will be politically damaging to Bush. "We've been
fighting for nearly 21 months -- fighting the administration, the
White House," says Monica Gabrielle. Her husband, Richard, an
insurance broker who worked for Aon Corp. on the 103rd floor of the
World Trade Center's Tower 2, died during the attacks. "As soon as we
started looking for answers we were blocked, put off and ignored at
every stop of the way. We were shocked. The White House is just
blocking everything."

Another 9/11 family advocate?was more blunt: "Bush has done
everything in his power to squelch this commission and prevent
it from happening." 46

After opposing the creation of the 9/11 Commission, the White House
wanted to limit any appearance by the president to just one hour
spent with two of the commissioners. A compromise was met such that
George Bush did eventually meet with the Commission on April 29,
2004, but only under stringent conditions. Bush had to have Dick
Cheney at his side, testifying at the same time; testimony was given
in private and not under oath; no press coverage was allowed; and no
recordings or transcripts were made of what they said. 47 Further
suspicion had been raised just over two weeks earlier, when the White
House was forced to release a daily intelligence briefing given to
the president whilst on vacation at his ranch in Crawford, Texas,
five weeks before 9/11. The briefing was titled "Bin Laden Determined
To Strike in US," and stated: "FBI information?indicates patterns of
suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for
hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance
of federal buildings in New York?. CIA and the FBI are investigating
a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin
Laden supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives." 48
Despite receiving this, according to the New York Times, "Bush broke
off from work early and spent most of that day fishing." 49

What is also interesting is that several key members of the Bush
administration, including Cheney, Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, had
been members of a neoconservative think-tank called the Project for
the New American Century (PNAC). In September 2000, PNAC wrote a
report called Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and
Resources for a New Century, which they hoped would be "a road map
for the nation's immediate and future defense plans." In it they
complained: "The post-Cold War world will not remain a relatively
peaceful place if we continue to neglect foreign and defense
matters." However, they added: "serious attention, careful thought,
and the willingness to devote adequate resources to maintaining
America's military strength can make the world safer and American
strategic interests more secure now and in the future." 50 They
stated that to "preserve American military preeminence in the coming
decades" America would need to undergo a "military transformation."
51 However, they wrote, this transformation would be "a long one,
absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl
Harbor." 52 One year later, 9/11 happened. As George
W. Bush wrote in his diary that night: "The Pearl Harbor of the 21st
century took place today." 53

After this catastrophic, catalyzing event, actions proposed by the
Project for the New American Century soon came into force. As John
Pilger wrote of PNAC:

" it recommended an increase in arms-spending by $48bn so
that Washington could "fight and win multiple, simultaneous major
theatre wars". This has happened. It said the United States should
develop "bunker-buster" nuclear weapons and make "star wars" a
national priority. This is happening. It said that, in the event of
Bush taking power, Iraq should be a target. And so it is. 54
Furthermore, during his 2000 election campaign and after, Bush
repeatedly promised a budget surplus, except in the event of a
recession, war or a national emergency. In the days after 9/11, he
said to his budget director: "Lucky me. I hit the trifecta." 55 (A
'trifecta' is a kind of bet that requires picking the top three
finishers in a race.)

With so much suspicious evidence, one lawyer, Stanley Hilton -- a
former aide to Senator Bob Dole -- has filed a $7 billion suit on
behalf of the families of 14 victims of the 9/11 attacks, alleging
that Bush, along with Cheney, Rumsfeld and others, actually ordered
9/11 to happen for political gain. Hilton says he has incriminating
documents and witnesses showing this. Calling it "the biggest act of
treason and mass murder in American history," he claims that 9/11 was
a 'decoy operation': "You make the people focus on the decoy to avoid
looking at the real criminals. So they are focusing on these so-
called nineteen hijackers and saying, 'Oh, it must have been these
Arabs.' When, in fact, the guilty person is at 1600 Pennsylvania
Avenue -- sitting in the Oval Office." 56

I have already discussed White House attempts to prevent or hinder
any official inquiry into 9/11. But another less known example, where
there has been a lack of investigation and a suppression of important
evidence relating to 9/11, is in the unlikely situation of the
retirement community that is Venice, in southwestern Florida.

THE MOHAMED ATTA MYTH

Of the four alleged 9/11 suicide-pilots, three had been in attendance
at two flight schools at the tiny airport in Venice, Florida: Huffman
Aviation and Florida Flight Training. Both were owned by Dutch men
who purchased the schools within months of each other, in 1999. Soon
after they took over, the schools began training unprecedented
numbers of Arab flight students. 57 Yet Huffman Aviation and Florida
Flight Training, along with the dubious characters who ran them, have
so far avoided any serious investigation or media attention. One man
who has tried to make up for this is investigative reporter Daniel
Hopsicker, who spent two years following the attacks in Venice,
examining the training of the alleged hijackers. He reports his
findings in his book Welcome to Terrorland: Mohamed Atta & the 9-11
Cover-up in Florida. As well as describing evidence of large-scale
illegal activity going on in and around the Venice Airport, this book
casts serious doubt upon the official account of who the hijackers
really were.

We have all heard how these 19 alleged hijackers were Islamic
extremists. Yet evidence uncovered by Hopsicker, particularly
regarding alleged ringleader Mohamed Atta, depicts unlikely
personalities and lifestyles for a bunch of religious fanatics. For
example, almost totally ignored by the mainstream press is that Atta
had an American girlfriend for over two months whilst in Venice, with
whom he would go out clubbing almost every night. At the time, this
attractive young woman -- Amanda Keller -- had spiky pink hair and
was working as a 'lingerie model' for an escort service called
Fantasies & Lace. Atta is known to have been a heavy drinker who
snorted cocaine. Local newspapers reported how in February 2001,
along with Keller, he went on a three-day binge of drinking and drug
taking in Key West. 58

Just days before 9/11, Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi (another of the
alleged suicide-pilots) spent the evening drinking heavily at a bar
in Fort Lauderdale. The bar's manager later told reporters that the
men "got wasted," drinking "Stolichnaya and orange juice, and Captain
Morgan's spiced rum and Coke." Bartender Patricia Idrissi concurred,
saying: "Atta drank Stoli vodka for three straight hours?. They were
wasted." 59 Amanda Keller describes a typical night out at a club
with Atta: "Marwan was in the reggae room drinking with a
bunch of women at the bar, there were a lot of women around him, and
he was just flaunting money." As Hopsicker points out: "It's one
thing to hear Atta described as living it up with wine, women and
song. But Marwan flaunting money at the bar pretty much puts the lie
to the 'Islamic fundamentalist' tag." 60

Hopsicker suggests that, rather than being a fundamentalist Muslim,
Mohamed Atta better fits the profile of a member of Arab society's
privileged elite and also a spy. Amongst many oddities contradicting
the 'fundamentalist' label is the fact that his e-mail list included
the names of several employees of U.S. defense contractors. 61 More
alarming, he and as many as six of the other alleged 9/11 hijackers
appear to have trained at U.S. military bases. Hopsicker writes:

"On the Saturday following the Tuesday attack, the Los Angeles Times
broke the story in a long article on their front page. 'A defense
official said two of the hijackers were former Saudi fighter
pilots,'reported the paper, 'who had studied in exchange programs at
the Defense Language School at Lackland Air Force Base in Texas and
the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama.'"

The story went wide the next day, Sunday, September 15th. Newsweek,
the Washington Post and the Miami Herald all reported as many as
seven of the terrorist hijackers in the September 11th attacks
received training at secure U.S. Military installations.

"Two of 19 suspects named by the FBI, Saeed Alghamdi and Ahmed
Alghamdi, have the same names as men listed at a housing facility for
foreign military trainees at Pensacola. Two others, Hamza Alghamdi
and Ahmed Alnami, have names similar to individuals listed in public
records as using the same address inside the base," the Washington
Post reported.

"In addition, a man named Saeed Alghamdi graduated from the Defense
Language Institute at Lackland Air Force Base in San Antonio, while
men with the same names as two other hijackers, Mohamed Atta and
Abdulaziz Alomari, appear as graduates of the U.S. International
Officers School at Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama, and the Aerospace
Medical School at Brooks Air Force Base in San Antonio,
respectively," the Post said. 62

Newsweek detailed how U.S. Military facilities routinely trained
pilots for other countries: "A former Navy pilot told NEWSWEEK that
during his years on the base, 'we always, always, always trained
other countries' pilots?. Whoever the country du jour is, that's
whose pilots we train.' Candidates begin with 'an officer's
equivalent of boot camp,' he said. 'Then they would put them through
flight training.'" 63

Hopsicker explains how this crucial story came to be dismissed:

"Someone was going to have to answer? for a lot."

"But Atta is a fairly common surname in the Middle East," the Post
quoted Laila Alquatami of the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination
Committee as saying, and the suspected hijacker's first name is
"probably the No. 1 name that is given to babies, in honor of the
prophet Mohamed."

The Boston Globe reported the Pentagon's denial: "Some of the FBI
suspects had names similar to those used by foreign alumni of U.S.
Military courses," said the Air Force in a statement. "Discrepancies
in their biographical data?indicate we are probably not talking about
the same people."

How easy was it to tell the Pentagon was lying? Think about it. It is
neither plausible nor logical that the reports were false because of
seven separate cases of mistaken identity. One or two, maybe. But
seven? No way. 64

None of the newspapers retracted the story, yet it disappeared. One
person who sought answers was Senator Bill Nelson, who faxed Attorney
General John Ashcroft, demanding to know if the story was really
true. However:

"The Senator has still not received a reply, we heard from his
spokesman, when we called his office eleven months later. In the wake
of those reports, we asked about the Pensacola Naval Air Station but
we never got a definitive answer from the Justice Department," stated
the Senator's press spokesman.

"So we asked the FBI for an answer 'if and when' they could provide
us one. Their response to date has been that they are trying to sort
through something complicated and difficult." 65

Deciding to investigate for himself, Hopsicker phoned the Pentagon
and spoke with the public information officer who helped write and
disseminate their original denial of the story:

"Biographically, they're not the same people," she explained
patiently, using the same language contained in the Air Force's press
release. "Some of the ages are twenty years off." ? Was she saying
that the age of the 'Mohamed Atta' who had attended the Air Force's
International Officer's School at Maxwell Air Force Base was
different than that of 'terrorist ringleader Mohamed Atta?'

Not exactly, she admitted. She could not confirm that -- in this
specific instance -- they had different ages. What she could do was
once again deny that the International Officer's School attendee
named Mohamed Atta had been the Mohamed Atta who piloted a passenger
plane into the World Trade Center.

However, she could offer no specifics for her assertion, and
repeatedly declined requests for biographical details about the
Mohamed Atta who had trained at Maxwell Air Force Base. 66

After Hopsicker's persistent questioning, she finally said in
exasperation: "I do not have the authority to tell you who attended
which schools." Hopsicker reflects: "It was hard to read this as
anything other than a back-handed confirmation. When she said that
she didn't have the authority, the clear implication was that someone
else does? Somewhere in the Defense Dept. a list exists with the
names of Sept. 11 terrorists who received training at U.S. Military
facilities. She just didn't have the authority to release it." 67
Furthermore, Hopsicker spoke to a woman who works at the Maxwell Air
Force Base in Alabama:

"I have a girlfriend who recognized Mohamed Atta. She met him at a
party at the Officer's Club," she told us. "The reason she swears it
was him here is because she didn't just meet him and say hello. After
she met him she went around and introduced him to the people that
were with her. So she knows it was him."

Saudis were a highly visible presence at Maxwell Air Force Base, she
said. "There were a lot of them living in an upscale complex in
Montgomery. They had to get all of them out of here. "They were all
gone the day after the attack." 68

Despite it being a key 9/11 crime scene, there has been a surprising
absence of investigations into the goings on in Venice, Florida. In
fact, to the contrary, "the FBI's full attention seemed to have been
engaged -- not in investigating what had happened -- but in
suppressing evidence and even intimidating the witnesses who had seen
and heard things that fly in the face of the 'official story.'" 69
For example, Mohamed Atta's former girlfriend Amanda Keller says that
even after she left Venice, the FBI called on her every other day for
several months, telling her not to talk to anybody. Similarly, a
woman called Stephanie Frederickson who lived next-door to Atta and
Keller in Venice reported how she and other residents at the same
apartment building were harassed and intimidated by FBI agents, to
prevent them from talking to reporters.

According to Frederickson: "The question asked was always
the same. You aren't saying anything to anybody, are you? At first,
right after the attack, they told me I must have been mistaken in my
identification. Or they would insinuate that I was lying. Finally
they stopped trying to get me to change my story, and just stopped by
once a week to make sure I hadn't been talking to anyone. 70

What is more, the FBI arrived in Venice just hours after the 9/11
attacks. A former manager from Huffman Aviation said: "They were
outside my house four hours after the attack." He added: "My phones
have been bugged, they still are?. How did the FBI get here so soon?
Ask yourself: How'd they got here so soon?" 71 Within 24 hours of the
attacks, records from Huffman Aviation, where Atta and al-Shehhi
attended, were escorted aboard a C-130 cargo plane to Washington by
Florida governor and brother of the president Jeb Bush. Similarly,
according to a sergeant with the Venice police, the FBI took all
their files and flew them to Washington with Jeb Bush aboard.
(Presumably this was on the same flight as the Huffman records.)
Hopsicker notes: "The important point was that taking files was a lot
different than copying them. The FBI wasn't taking any chances." 72
He concludes: "There is a demonstrable, provable, and massive
federally-supervised cover-up in place in Florida." 73

As this and my previous evidence shows, there are countless
unanswered questions about 9/11 that at some point are going to have
to be properly examined. Even an investigation into just a few of
these questions, such as those around the war games on 9/11, could be
enough to start a major scandal. However, as numerous writers and
independent researchers have found, there are so many suspicious
circumstances that the truth could be very different to what we have
been led to believe. The human rights lawyer Richard Falk has
written: "There are so many gaping holes in the official accounts of
9/11 that no plausible coherent narrative remains, and until now we
have been staggering forward as if the truth about these traumatic
events no longer mattered." 74 But if the mainstream press start
investigating properly, it could lead to a completely unprecedented
'9/11 scandal.'


ENDNOTES

1 David Hearst, "Nato directionless on nuclear policy." The Guardian,
January 19, 2003. www.guardian.co.uk
2 "UK restates nuclear threat." BBC News, February 2, 2003. news.bbc.co.uk
3 John Pilger, "John Pilger investigates US plans for mini-nukes."
New Statesman, August 18, 2003.
4 Duncan Campbell, "Bush in new threat to Iran and Syria." The
Guardian, July 22, 2003.
5 Richard Norton-Taylor, "US hawk warns Iran threat must be
eliminated." The Guardian, October 10, 2003.
6 From Paul Thompson, "The Failure to Defend the Skies on 9/11."
Center for Cooperative Research.http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/
essay.jsp?article=essayairdefense
7 "Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of
Impending 9-11 Attacks and 'Consciously Failed' To Act; 66% Call For
New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York's Attorney
General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals." Zogby International,
August 30, 2004. Online at: www.zogby.com
ID=855
8 Antonia Zerbisias, "Poking holes in the official story of 9/11."
Toronto Star, May 26, 2004.
9 Michael Gavin, "September 11 conspiracy claims find large
readership." Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, September 5, 2003.
10 Quoted in Kate Connolly, "German Sept 11 theory stokes anti-US
feeling." The Telegraph, November 20, 2003.
11 From "Secretary Rumsfeld Interview with Larry King." Larry King
Live, CNN, December 5, 2001. Transcript at:http://www.defenselink.mil/
transcripts/2001/t12062001_t1205sd. html
12 Ibid.
13 From "Chairman Cox's Statement on the Terrorist Attack on
America." September 11, 2001. Online at:http://cox.house.gov/html/
release.cfm?id=33
14 From "Day One Transcript: 9/11 Commission Hearing." Washington
Post, March 23, 2004. Online at:http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-
dyn/A17798-2004Mar23
15 From "'The Pentagon Goes to War': National Military Command
Center: A look at 9/11 at the Pentagon's National Military Command
Center." American Morning With Paula Zahn, CNN, September 4, 2002.
Transcript at:http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/
cnn090402.html "9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings." ABC News,
September 11, 2002. Transcript at: www.cooperativeresearch.org
timeline/2002/abcnews091102.html
16 The 9/11 Commission Report: The Full Final Report of the National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, Executive
Summary. 2004, p. 15. Online at: www.9-11commission.gov
911ReportExec.pdf
17 See Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, CJCSI 3610.01A, June 1,
2001. Online athttp://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/
3610_01a.pdf. Due to the fact that this new procedure was introduced
just three months before 9/11, several individuals have questioned
whether this new instruction, requiring secretary of defense approval
in responding to hijackings, was introduced deliberately so as to
hinder the interception of the hijacked planes on 9/11. However, this
requirement was not new: The previous instruction for dealing with
hijackings, dated July 31, 1997, also required approval from the
defense secretary. See:http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/cjcsd/cjcsi/
3610_01.pdf
18 The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, PBS, September 10, 2003. Transcript
at: www.pbs.org
rumsfeld_09-10.html
19 "Testimony of U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
Prepared for Delivery to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks
Upon the United States." March 23, 2004, p. 21. Online at: www.
9-11commission.gov/hearings/hearing 8/rumsfeld_statement.pdf
20 The 9/11 Commission Report: The Full Final Report of the National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. New York: W.
W. Norton, 2004, p. 35.
21 The 9/11 Commission Report, pp. 39-40.
22 "Sept. 11 Scramble." ABC News, September 14, 2002. abcnews.go.com
23 "9/11 Commission Hearing." May 23, 2003. Transcript at: www.
9-11commission.gov/archive/
hearing2/9-11Commission_Hearing_200 3-05-23.pdf
24 Dan Balz and Bob Woodward, "America's Chaotic Road to War."
Washington Post, January 27, 2002.
25 The 9/11 Commission Report, p. 40.
26 Ibid., p. 41.
27 Daniel Klaidman and Michael Hirsh, "Who Was Really In Charge?"
Newsweek, June 28, 2004.
28 Ibid.
29 Ibid.
30 Meet the Press, NBC, May 26, 2002. Transcript online at: http:// dashpac.com
31 The 9/11 Commission states: "Prior to 9/11, it was understood that
an order to shoot down a commercial aircraft would have to be issued
by the National Command Authority (a phrase used to describe the
president and secretary of defense)." From The 9/11 Commission
Report, p. 17. Previous news reports had said the president was the
only person with the authority to order the shooting down of a
civilian plane. See Jamie McIntyre, "Pentagon never considered
downing Stewart's Learjet." CNN, October 26, 1999.http://
edition.cnn.com/US/9910/26/shootdown/ Kevin Dennehy, "'I Thought It
Was the Start of World War III'." Cape Cod Times, August 21, 2002.
32 From Illarion Bykov and Jared Israel, "Guilty for 9-11, Part 3:
Bush in the Open." The Emperor's New Clothes, January 18, 2002,
revised September 12, 2003. www.emperors-clothes.com/indict/
indict-3.htm
33 "Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer." September 7, 2001. Online at: www.whitehouse.gov
34 From Allan Wood and Paul Thompson, "An Interesting Day: President
Bush's Movements and Actions on 9/11." Center for Cooperative
Research, May 9, 2003. www.cooperativeresearch.org
article=essayaninterestingday
35 Quoted in Susan Taylor Martin, "Of fact, fiction: Bush on 9/11."
St. Petersburg Times, July 4, 2004.
36 Ibid.
37 The 9/11 Commission Report, p. 38.
38 Ibid., p. 38.
39 Ibid., p. 39.
40 From Allan Wood and Paul Thompson, "An Interesting Day."
41 Gail Sheehy, "Who's in Charge Here?" Mother Jones, July 22, 2004.
42 See Allan Wood and Paul Thompson, "An Interesting Day."
43 Ibid.
44 Ibid.
45 "Remarks by the President After Two Planes Crash Into World Trade
Center." September 11, 2001. Online at:http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/
releases/2001/09/20010911.html
46 Eric Boehlert, "Bush's 9/11 coverup?" Salon, June 18, 2003.
47 From Julian Borger, "Bush to face tough questions on 9/11." The
Guardian, April 29, 2004; "Hiding in the White House." The Boston
Globe, April 30, 2004.
48 This briefing is available online at: edition.cnn.com
images/04/10/whitehouse.pdf
49 Frank Rich, "Thanks for the Heads-Up." New York Times, May 25, 2002.
50 The Project for the New American Century, Rebuilding America's
Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century. September
2000, p. iii.
51 Ibid., p. 50.
52 Ibid., p. 51.
53 Dan Balz and Bob Woodward, "America's Chaotic Road to War."
54 John Pilger, "Two years ago a project set up by the men who now
surround George W. Bush said what America needed was 'a new Pearl
Harbor'. Its published aims have come alarmingly true." New
Statesman, December 16, 2002.
55 "Remarks By Office Of Management And Budget Director Mitchell E.
Daniels, Jr. At Conference Board Annual Meeting." October 16, 2001.
Online at: www.whitehouse.gov
daniels_conference_board_speech10-1 6-01.html
56 From "Alex Jones Interviews Stanley Hilton." The Alex Jones Show,
September 10, 2004. Transcript at:http://www.serendipity.li/wot/
hilton_interview.htm
57 From: Daniel Hopsicker, Welcome to Terrorland: Mohamed Atta & the
9-11 Cover-up in Florida. Eugene: The MadCow Press, 2004, pp. 171-182.
58 Ibid., pp. 68-69.
59 Ibid., p. 81.
60 Ibid., p. 284.
61 Ibid., p. 105.
62 Ibid., pp. 135-136.
63 George Wehrfritz, Catharine Skipp and John Barry, "Alleged
Hijackers May Have Trained at U.S. Bases." Newsweek, September 15,
2001.
64 Daniel Hopsicker, Welcome to Terrorland, pp. 136-137.
65 Ibid., p. 138.
66 Ibid., p. 139.
67 Ibid., p. 140.
68 Ibid., p. 141.
69 Ibid., p. 301.
70 Ibid., pp. 62-63.
71 Ibid., p. 150.
72 Ibid., p. 31.
73 Ibid., p. 301.
74 From his forward to David Ray Griffin, The New Pearl Harbor, p. vii.



See archive of cover-up news articles at www.WantToKnow.info/
coverupnews
order.kagi.com

Explore these empowering websites coordinated by website founder Fred
Burks: www.momentoflove.org - Every person in the world has a heart www.WantToKnow.info - Revealing major cover-ups & working
together for the good of all www.gcforall.org - Building a Global Community for All www.weboflove.org - Strengthening the Web of Love that
interconnects us all
Together, we are building a better world based on love and cooperation

-- To subscribe to or unsubscribe from the WantToKnow.info email list
(avg. one every two or three days), send an email to
[email protected] with "subscribe deep" or "unsubscribe deep" in
the subject line.


This message is available on the Internet at http:// WantToKnow.info
www.commondreams.org




+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++
AmericanLawyer links 404 American lawyers
PLEASE invite your attorney friends to join by sending a message to
[email protected] or contact 714-535-5090 or
[email protected])
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++
( ( ( Other FREE lists you can join ) ) ) )
[email protected] ~ Immigration lawyers
[email protected] ~ California plaintiff lawyers
[email protected] ~ Orange County, CA lawyers
[email protected] ~ Arab American attorneys &
friends
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++
Yahoo! Groups Links