49

9/11: Seven Questions to Evaluate Nineteen Suspects

Kevin Ryan

Who could have committed the crimes of September 11, 2001? Answering that question requires understanding the details of 1) what happened that should not have happened and 2) what did not happen that should have happened. Additionally, it requires asking specific, well-formulated questions and seeking answers that are evidence-based to assess potential suspects in terms of means, motive, and opportunity.

In my book Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects, a case is made for the investigation of nineteen people who were in position to do everything that was needed to affect the crimes. These legitimate suspects can be compared to the nineteen young Arabs who were accused of the crimes yet who did not have the means or opportunity to accomplish most of what happened that day.

The following seven questions should be asked when considering suspects. For each question, my nominees are described.

1. Who could have prevented U.S. intelligence agencies from tracking down and stopping the alleged hijackers before 9/11?

  • Louis Freeh was Director of the FBI for the nine years leading up to 9/11. Under Freeh’s leadership, the FBI failed miserably at preventing terrorism when preventing terrorism was the FBI’s primary goal. During this time the actions of FBI management suggest that it was facilitating and covering-up acts of terrorism. After 9/11, Freeh went on to become the personal attorney for Saudi Arabian ambassador Prince Bandar and a director for a company linked to 9/11 insider trading.
  • As Director of the Central Intelligence Agency (DCI) from 1997 to 2004, George Tenet led an agency that botched and bungled its duties related to counterterrorism. The evidence suggests that, as with Louis Freeh and the FBI, at least some of those failures were intentional. Tenet had developed secret paths of communication with Saudi authorities and he appears to have disrupted plans to capture or investigate al Qaeda suspects.
  • Richard Clarke was appointed U.S. “Counterterrorism Czar” by President George H.W. Bush in1992 and he held that position until after the 9/11 attacks. Clarke was also a member of the highly secret Continuity of Government planning group along with Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and he implemented that secret plan for the first time on 9/11. He was a personal representative of the government of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), a country that financed terrorism and had many ties to 9/11. Clarke predicted terrorist attacks on Washington and New York and, through tipping off his friends in the UAE, was behind the failure of two CIA attempts to kill or capture Osama Bin Laden. On 9/11, he led the secure White House videoconference that failed to respond to the attacks.
  • Richard Armitage was a special operations soldier, long-time covert operative, and a member of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC). On 9/11, Armitage was Deputy Secretary of State and, in this role, he implemented an express approval program that provided visas to the alleged 9/11 hijackers. On 9/11, he was involved in the secure videoconference run by Richard Clarke that failed to respond to the hijacked airliners.

2. Who could have disabled the systems in place to prevent hijackings that should have been effective?

  • On 9/11, General Michael Canavan was in the role of hijack coordinator for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) but he was mysteriously missing that morning. Canavan’s role was most responsible for communications between the FAA and the military and his absence was critical to the failure of air defenses. Having only started as FAA’s hijack coordinator just months earlier, Canavan left the position in October 2001. According to an FAA intelligence employee, Canavan started his job by running training exercises that were “pretty damn close to the 9/11 plot.”
  • Duane Andrews, a long time protégé of Dick Cheney, was a leading expert on the defense systems that failed on 9/11. At the time, he led the company Science Applications International (SAIC) that created the national databases to track and identify terrorists, supplied U.S. airports with terrorism screening equipment, predicted and investigated terrorist attacks against U.S. infrastructure including national defense networks and the WTC, helped create the official account for what happened at the WTC both in 1993 and after 9/11, was a leader in research on thermitic materials like those found in the WTC dust, led the robotics team that scoured the pile at Ground Zero using equipment capable of eliminating explosives, and provided the information to capture the alleged mastermind of the attacks, Khalid Sheik Mohammed.
  • Benedict Sliney was the FAA’s Command Center national operations manager on 9/11. It was his first day in the job, having just left a lucrative law career defending Wall Street financiers. Despite his lack of experience, his FAA superiors deferred to him as the attacks proceeded and allowed him to take charge of the response to the hijacked airliners. Sliney’s failure to respond effectively on the day of the attacks, allegedly not even knowing how to respond, contributed significantly to the failure of the national air defenses.

3. Who could have disabled the U.S. chain of command that should have immediately responded to the attacks but did not?

  • Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was in charge of U.S. defenses on 9/11. After the Pentagon was hit, Rumsfeld wandered out to the parking lot for approximately 30 minutes. His presence there showed that he was not concerned about other planes that were reported as hijacked, as if he knew what to expect. Rumsfeld did not concern himself with the work of his direct subordinate, NORAD Commander Ralph Eberhart, and he did not do his job to ensure the nation’s air defenses. Rumsfeld and his Defense department later failed to cooperate with 9/11 investigations.
  • Vice President Dick Cheney was in charge at the White House on 9/11 and is known to have been the primary decision maker that day. In the Presidential Emergency Operations Center, Cheney gave instructions that appear to have directed a stand down of air defenses as well as an order to shoot down United Flight 93. Cheney later worked to prevent any investigation into 9/11 and led a campaign of lies to start the Iraq War.

4. Who could have disabled the U.S. national air defenses that should have responded effectively and intercepted some, if not all, of the hijacked aircraft?

  • Ralph Eberhart, the commander of NORAD on 9/11, sponsored the highly coincidental military exercises (i.e. war games) that obstructed the military response. Twelve hours before the attacks, Eberhart apparently ordered the defense readiness alert system Infocon to its least protective level, making it easier to hack or compromise the defense computer networks. Failing in his duties to protect the nation while giving orders that further prevented response, Eberhart later lied to Congress about the military’s knowledge of the hijackings.
  • As a special agent in charge for the Secret Service, Carl Truscott supervised all protective matters relating to the president, the first family, and the White House. The response of the Secret Service to the 9/11 attacks suggests foreknowledge of the events because the agency failed to protect the president from the obvious danger posed by terrorists. Combined with the failure of the Secret Service to follow-up on offers of air support from Andrews Air Force Base, this led to the suspicion that the agency was complicit in the attacks.

5. Who could have caused three WTC skyscrapers to fall through the path of what should have been the most resistance?

  • Brian Michael Jenkins, as deputy chairman of Crisis Management for Kroll Associates, played a leading role in planning for terrorist events at the WTC, including having reviewed the possibility of airliner crashes into the towers. A special operations soldier and long-time right-wing political advisor, Jenkins had been accused of implementing a “terror war” in Central America during the 1980s.
  • Wirt Walker was named a 9/11 insider trading suspect in previously classified 9/11 Commission documents. Walker’s company Stratesec provided security services for the WTC, United Airlines (which owned two of the planes hijacked on 9/11), and Dulles Airport (where American Airlines Flight 77 took off that day). Stratesec held its annual meetings in offices leased by Saudi Arabia and Walker also ran an aviation company in Oklahoma at an airport that was associated with the alleged hijackers.
  • Barry McDaniel was the chief operating officer of Stratesec. McDaniel was in charge of WTC security in terms of what he called a completion contract, to provide services up to the day the buildings fell down. He is also an Iran-Contra suspect and previously worked for companies that conducted covert operations, like Sears World Trade and The Vinnell Corporation. After 9/11, McDaniel went on to start a business with Dick Cheney’s former business partner, Bruce Bradley.
  • Rudy Giuliani was Mayor of New York City on 9/11. He and his staff had foreknowledge that the WTC Towers would fall when no one could have predicted such a thing. Giuliani was also responsible for the destruction of critical WTC evidence at Ground Zero. In a crime that continues to take lives, he told people in the area that the air was safe to breathe, when it was not, in order to speed the removal of evidence.
  • L. Paul Bremer’s career with the State Department and as managing director of Kissinger Associates led to him becoming, like Jenkins, one of few leading experts on terrorism before 9/11. On the day of 9/11, Bremer had an office in the South Tower of the WTC and was working for Marsh & McLennan, a company that occupied all the impact floors in the North Tower. Also associated with a company that had patented a thermite demolition device, Bremer was one of the first people to provide the official account for what happened on television that morning.

6. Who could have coordinated an attack against the Pentagon that struck the exact spot that had just been renovated while allowing all Pentagon leadership to escape unharmed?

  • Paul Wolfowitz was Deputy Secretary of Defense on 9/11. Along with Armitage, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz was a leader of the organization PNAC that, one year before 9/11, had called for a transformational event “like a New Pearl Harbor” to reinvigorate U.S. military spending. In the eight months leading up to 9/11, Wolfowitz led the Pentagon building project that renovated the exact spot where Flight 77 was reported to have impacted the building.
  • Peter Janson was the chief officer of AMEC Construction, the company that performed the renovation work on the Pentagon building in the exact spot where it was hit on 9/11. AMEC was also hired to clean-up the debris at both the Pentagon and the WTC immediately after the attacks. A long-time business associate of Donald Rumsfeld, Janson went on to benefit from the War on Terror as a director of an oil and gas transport company.

7. Who could have ensured that no effective investigation was conducted and that no one was held accountable?

  • Porter Goss was a CIA operative who, after 9/11, became DCI. On the day of 9/11, Goss was meeting with Pakistani secret service (ISI) General Mahmud Ahmed as the first plane struck the WTC. He later helped cover-up the crimes through his leadership of the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11. As DCI in 2004, Goss took actions to ensure that no one in the intelligence community was held responsible for 9/11.
  • Robert Mueller, although not named as a suspect in my book, was a leader of the 9/11 cover-up in his role as director of the FBI, a position he took one week before the 9/11 attacks. Mueller had a history of covering-up government crimes including FBI collusion with organize crime, the 1988 bombing of Pan Am 103, and the CIA terrorist financing network known as BCCI. That made him the perfect guy to lead the FBI investigation into 9/11.

It should be obvious that the 19 young Arab suspects accused of the crimes could not have accomplished any of the things required to pull off the 9/11 crimes, as described in these seven questions that need to be answered.  In fact, the evidence indicates they could not even fly small aircraft. On the other hand, the suspects noted above not only had the means, motive, and opportunity to carry out the crimes, many of them were long-time associates known to have engaged in covert operations or cover-ups. Anyone who is objective in an analysis of 9/11 suspects knows which of these groups should be investigated first.

This article first appeared on DigWithin.net,

SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN

If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

49 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Antonym
Antonym
Sep 15, 2019 5:36 PM

From the horse’s mouth (eye witness Edward Snowden at Fort Meade): the NSA had no clue and evacuated the place the minute a second plane hit the WTC: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/sep/15/edward-snowden-on-911-and-why-he-joined-the-army-now-finally-there-was-a-fight

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 13, 2019 5:23 PM

There’s either that psychotic emptiness in their eyes, or just the rigid face of egotistic determination to do whatever the hell they like.
I’m beginning to know them at sight…

TFS
TFS
Sep 13, 2019 11:10 AM

Philip D. Zelikow

His outline, apparantley drafted 16 months before the comission reported.

https://hcgroups.wordpress.com/2009/08/07/911-commission-report-outline-from-spring-2003-similar-to-final-report/

He could have a least had a section dealing with the vulumnious information Bush had about who was responsible in the hours after the attack….oh wait!

Deschutes
Deschutes
Sep 13, 2019 7:57 AM

New Univ. of Alaska study disagrees with NIST on WTC building 7: did NOT collapse from fire-
http://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7
“The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”

Mucho
Mucho
Sep 12, 2019 11:43 PM

Interesting and worthy 9/11 summary from AlienScientist, a longtime promoter of Kevin Ryan and his contribution to solving 9/11

The Men Behind 9/11: COGs in the Machine – The Ultimate 9/11 Conspiracy Theory

Robbobbobin
Robbobbobin
Sep 12, 2019 10:41 PM

“In my book Another Nineteen: Investigating Legitimate 9/11 Suspects, a case is made for the investigation of nineteen people who were in position to do everything that was needed to affect the crimes.” OK. To start in the middle, at random because that’s where a few random scrolls down got me to: “Twelve hours before the attacks, Eberhart apparently ordered the defense readiness alert system Infocon to its least protective level, making it easier to hack or compromise the defense computer networks.” (My emphasis) There follows a list of proposed suspectible names, each with some incontrovertibly documented fact and a lot of “apparently”, with links of each name to a great deal more of the same proportionate mix of fact and “apparently”, supported by extensive footnotes with citations of and references to sources that, in turn, have about the same mix of fact and “apparently”. “Investigating” all that meticulously presented… Read more »

Igor
Igor
Sep 13, 2019 12:52 AM
Reply to  Robbobbobin

I take it as a carefully compiled list of persons who were in positions key to pulling off 9/11. Personnel below their level could not have done 9/11 without authorization and support from above. Which leads right back to this group. There are multiple interconnections between the individuals. No careers suffered as a result of apparent failures on 9/11. They may have stepped down from their government roles, but went right through the revolving door to the Industrial arm of the military industrial complex. Means and motive is present in each individual. The 19 accused “terrorists” were not in any position to cause a tower to free fall into the building’s footprint. They were in no position to ensure the removal of the contents of the scene of the crime to Staten Island, then on to China. It works out well that they were all suicide “terrorists”. Wonder what actually… Read more »

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 13, 2019 5:34 PM
Reply to  Robbobbobin

I reckon that’s a valid criticism, and, like you, I am always looking for signs that somebody is actually going to do something. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, as well as Lawyers, First Responders and others are certainly doing their best – and their best is most impressive, but of course the entire might of the “establishment” is lined up against them. I imagine the criminals involved are counting on our collective memory lasting about 20 years, after which nobody will care about such “historic” (= antique) events any more. After all, how did those of us who are now in our later years feel twenty years after the end of WW2? I can remember being a child who thought it might as well be a million years ago for all the relevance it seemed to have to my life at the time. I’m pretty sure that will be… Read more »

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 13, 2019 9:40 PM
Reply to  wardropper

For the benefit of the unkind and judgemental person who voted that comment down, I should clarify that I am of course no longer a child, and so WW2 is naturally as relevant to me now as anything else concerning military matters and the evil things perpetrated in the name of “military thinking”.

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 13, 2019 9:56 PM
Reply to  wardropper

My point was that with each new generation comes more distance from crucial events, and my fear is simply that the 911 criminals will deliberately use that fact to the hilt.

Robbobbobin
Robbobbobin
Sep 13, 2019 11:10 PM
Reply to  wardropper
TFS
TFS
Sep 12, 2019 1:35 PM

Philip D. Zelikow is Dr Ray Griffins favoured trojan horse on the Commission Investigation into the event of 9/11

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 12, 2019 1:10 PM

The idea – as I see it – is not so much identifying WHO, but of recognising HOW. Any ‘who’ can be under their own narrative assumptions within their own personal agenda of identity and purpose. Everyone plays a part at some level and to put it the other way around, everybody plays apart – at some level. (The division of Consciousness to ‘levels’ is on a ‘need to know’ basis – and to turn that around – is also on a NEED-TO-NOT-KNOW basis *1 – see below *1. The only ‘how’ of planning, executing and managing the narratives while operating the power grab – for such a pivotal event that operates on many levels at once – is of such a deep rooted and pervasive corruption as to effectively run as a shadow power or dark economy and network of influence. The core nature of this is a logical… Read more »

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 12, 2019 4:04 PM
Reply to  Brian Steere
vexarb
vexarb
Sep 13, 2019 8:01 PM
Reply to  Brian Steere

@Brian Steere: “The idea – as I see it – is not so much identifying WHO, but of recognising HOW”

Kevin Ryan’s article is now putting The Case for the Prosecution, having previously established the Means to Hand of the criminals. At this level (of suspects rather than means) the WHO & the HOW are connected: by naming 19 suspects with interlocking connections by virtue of their office and authority within the Bush regime WHO could and/or did know HOW to act together in such a manner as to facilitate and/or fail to prevent the greatest terrorist atrocity in history .

vexarb
vexarb
Sep 14, 2019 7:19 PM
Reply to  vexarb

In short, at this high level of Executive Authority (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovitz) the WHO is the HOW.

SharonM
SharonM
Sep 12, 2019 11:43 AM

Off Guardian’s coverage of the 9/11 anniversary with 5 articles is great! Thank you:)

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Sep 12, 2019 9:31 AM

Interesting article exploring how the intelligence community intimidate the media (a system backed by compromised politicians) – this is not a defence of the Guardian, BTW, just exposing the apperatus which can control the flow of news/information.
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-09-11-how-the-uk-security-services-neutralised-the-countrys-leading-liberal-newspaper/amp/

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 12, 2019 4:10 PM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

Unaccountable ‘Notional Security’ trumps all else and doesn’t allow you to tell others that you cant tell anything but what its legal jurisdiction dictates. Or Else! On the other hand willing compliance receives rewards – or at least seeks mitigation of penalty under the enforced austerity of unnatural selection.

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Sep 12, 2019 8:58 AM

It’s obvious Julian Assange is not a spy.

It is obvious Jeremy Corbyn is not an antisemite.

It is obvious WMD was a fabrication to enable war.

And its obvious the 19 hijacker, 2 planes/3 towers version of 9/11 is the mother of all lies.

But one thing history has taught us: US foreign policy is above the law (aided and abetted by the rancid MSM, of course).

Corrupt US establishment figures have no intention of investigating themselves and there is no supranational authority that has the power, or at least the balls to call these murdering scum to account.

Great work by Paul Ryan, BTW – thnks for assembling this rogues gallery.
At least for some 9/11 watchers these smirking neocons have been found culpable, or at least complicit in the court of public opinion.

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Sep 12, 2019 9:00 AM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

Apologies, meant Kevin, not Paul.

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 12, 2019 4:51 PM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

Well the lie is untruth and the father of it is the wish that it pass off as true. Do you think the USA retained its sovereignty of in fact lost it long ago? We think in terms of convenient labels – but US could be seen to be a ‘pay for play’ global en forcer as one part of a broad spectrum dominance. Yes, the power to break law with impunity and re-make it as a weapon set over the populations of Earth, is as gods set over men or true humans set over sub-species. Such an ‘elitism’ has no country or belonging but uses any and every form of accepted authority or symbol of life – as a mask through which to get for itself. 911 may serve a mass awakening to a corrupted order that has been running in the shadow for a very long time. But… Read more »

vexarb
vexarb
Sep 12, 2019 6:42 AM

“9-11 was a Mossad operation.” Dr. Alan Sabrosky,

That would explain the origin of tons of Military Grade Nano Thermite which Bush brother’s company installed in WTC while “working on” the lift-shafts under armed guard, because the U$ Army keeps embarrassingly strict account when issuing Shaped Charge Explosives (aka Directed Energy Weapons) to civilian demolition contractors.

BBC CENSORS DR ALAN SABROSKY, former US Marine & US Army War College Director who says “It is 100% certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation”

https://sites.google.com/site/censorshipbythebbc/bbc-censors-dr-alan

Antonym
Antonym
Sep 12, 2019 11:35 AM
Reply to  vexarb

“9/11 was a Pakistani ISI operation”.

Etc.

Whoever done it, the some US officials mentioned ATL failed their job and should have been sacked for at minimum negligence.

Vexarb
Vexarb
Sep 13, 2019 11:27 AM
Reply to  Antonym

It was not Pakistani MI but Mossad agents who were caught dancing and high fiving while watching the Literal holocaust of 3,000 Gentiles on 911 2001.

Vexarb
Vexarb
Sep 13, 2019 11:50 AM
Reply to  Vexarb

PS It was not Pakistanis but Dual Citizen Israeli-Americans who were warned not to turn up for work at the WTC on that day. Including Larry Silverstein — the only time Lucky Larry did not turn up in his office as owner of the buildings; pity he did not cancel the appointment of the whistleblower who had been told to meet him there.

Antonym
Antonym
Sep 13, 2019 1:00 PM
Reply to  Vexarb

Thousands were dancing in the streets after 9/11 in Pakistan and on the West Bank.

Vexarb
Vexarb
Sep 13, 2019 5:24 PM
Reply to  Antonym

But only Israeli Mossad agents danced in NYC while viewing their holocaust of 3,000 Gentiles being burnt alive.

And it wasn’t a Pakistani shipping company but Israel’s ZIM who terminated their tenancy at a loss and vacated their office in WTC two months before 911 2001.

vexarb
vexarb
Sep 14, 2019 5:55 AM
Reply to  vexarb

Kevin Ryan’s link contains an interesting caveat: his list of suspects must be based on accusations that would hold up in a court of law.

“For instance, some people are convinced that Israel committed the crimes of 9/11. When asked why they think this, the answer is usually that Israel had foreknowledge as indicated by the “Dancing Israelis” and that Israel benefited because of the countries that were attacked after 9/11. However, as indicated above this reasoning is not convincing and would certainly never stand up in a court of law.”

https://digwithin.net/2016/02/27/investigating-911/

UreKismet
UreKismet
Sep 12, 2019 4:46 AM

What a great idea, get people to vanish up their own arseholes ‘investigating’ something where not only is it impossible to access, much less examine primary evidence, there is zero chance of altering the outcome. Every theory I have witnessed suffers from the same problem as the accepted theory only more so as it depends on always unreliable eye-witness evidence, second and third hand hearsay stuff plus logic flaws None of us will ever know what happened back then, there are many theories much speculation, and worst of all a big chunk of the world’s population are firmly cemented into what they believe happened and cannot be persuaded otherwise. However the results of the event are still with us, able to be examined, and are also badly wanting in rationale and humanity. IMO that is a better area to concentrate attention on, more pressing and more likely to meet with… Read more »

crank
crank
Sep 12, 2019 8:56 AM
Reply to  UreKismet

Me : Imagine if some or all of the writers on the anti-imperialist ‘Left’ put their names to the following statement and actively campaigned on it-
‘We the undersigned are without doubt that the official narrative of 9/11 is provably inaccurate and incomplete. Without subscribing to any alternative theory- yet considering the far reaching consequences of the crimes of 9/11, we all support the demand for a new, fully funded, independent, and fully empowered investigation.
signed,
Ben norton
Max blumenthal
John Pilger
Chris Hedges
Noam Chomsky
Aaron Mate
Glenn Greenwald
Amy Goodman
Lee Camp
Jimmy Dore
David Edwards and David Cromwell
Mark Curtis
Craig Murray
George Galloway
Jonathan Cook
….. et al’

Ure : whatever.

UreKismet
UreKismet
Sep 12, 2019 2:32 PM
Reply to  crank

Dream on crank. As if yet another missive signed by all the usuals whose previous correspondence has been studiously ignored would achieve SFA. Let a bit of amerikan ‘reality’ give you some perspective Foreign Policy dot com that journal of junior US diplomats’ angst has an article today which while looking through the wrong end of the microscope at least focuses on the world in September 2019 not September 2001. This article points out that this year’s intake of college freshmen is comprised of types born after 911 who have no frame of reference other than that where the official yarn is the standard reality, where the global war on terror has always been happening, the patriot act oppression is the society they know. It makes far more sense to change the awful results of the post 911 world than to try to argue the toss over arcane facts when… Read more »

crank
crank
Sep 12, 2019 3:10 PM
Reply to  UreKismet

Your argument is based on either – or. The ‘Truth Movement’ (or certainly the best of it) had as its primary goal the end of the ‘effects of 9/11’ – that was the whole point, as well as the bringing to justice of the perpetrators. The two things are inseparable, and unless you believe in selective justice and self limited reasoning then that should be obvious. The anti-war Left has disintegrated, and whilst I wouldn’t attribute all its demise to this issue, I think that failure to even engage in what is not (as you say) and endless round of what ifs and maybes, but incontrovertible proof that 9/11 was a massive fraud, has undermined its intellectual coherence and credibility. The aftermath of the events saw the Left in a corner where any moral position criticising the US ‘response’ to 9/11 was deemed to be sympathy with the terrorists. This… Read more »

crank
crank
Sep 12, 2019 3:21 PM
Reply to  UreKismet

As an example of how disconnected I think your approach is: if we were to compare notes on what we think the relationship berween Israel and the US is really about, then would the provable involvement and foreknowledge of Israel in 9/11 have any bearing? For you not, it would seem. Just ‘a distraction’. That is nonsensical.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/12/israel-white-house-spying-devices-1491351

George Mc
George Mc
Sep 12, 2019 10:32 PM
Reply to  UreKismet

I don’t see how you can “change the awful results of the post 911 world” without first – and constantly – challenging the official story. Yes, I am well aware that the chance of any “independent” investigation is zero and that that vast mountain range of media hacks will bleat away about “conspiracy nuts” from now till the end of time. The point is that by keeping up a constant barrage of querying the official account, you endanger the credibility of that account. Take JFK. The majority of Americans believe there was a cover up. Had the original sceptics gone along with your idea i.e. just shrug and say, “Oh it’s all so complex and hopeless. We’ll never know” etc. then the lone nut theory would have passed into historical record without any opposition. Also, I see no necessary contradiction between opposing a war on principal and opposing a war… Read more »

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 13, 2019 9:52 PM
Reply to  UreKismet

The world works slightly differently today.
People like myself now have the internet as a tool with which to search, and extremely widely at that. Finding a site like this one, for example, is invaluable.
When I was a teenager, all we had was a telephone…
When everybody knows what’s going on, they tend to get very annoyed with people who try to tell them lies.
I reckon we’re getting there. Very slowly, but we’re getting there.
People are even putting pictures of guillotines on FaceBook, for pete’s sake, and the message through the humour is not lost on their readers.

crank
crank
Sep 12, 2019 9:02 AM
Reply to  UreKismet

‘firmly cemented’ ?
Opinions are changing apparently. Polls show (below).
If we look at those at the forefront of today’s investigative reporting we might note that there are some who are at least open minded about the issue and see the importance of it.
Whitney Webb for example: https://www.mintpressnews.com/americans-questioning-official-september-11-new-wtc-7-evidence/261744/
Also Eva Bartlett, Vanessa Beeley, Abby Martin…

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Sep 12, 2019 9:07 AM
Reply to  UreKismet

9/11 was a major crime scene – are you saying it is not worth investigating because any investigation would be too difficult?

The official version of events has already been dismantled because of the work already done by scientists and various experts – surely the next step is to find a way of bringing these findings into a court of law so that the lies that were told can be exposed as a matter of public record?

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 12, 2019 5:21 PM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

I agree with you Harry but note that the holding of an opinion may be kept secret even from ourself, if its leaking could bring us and our family to ruin – or if its secrecy is held as a sacred trust by which our lives are vindicated regardless the passing show of events. The idea that one can go to a court and testify and justice be done, is all well and good – but the possibility of a true independent judiciary, and the abuse of the law as a weapon of obfuscation and denial – along with trial by media and dirty tricks that extend to loss of life and loved ones, all add up as a fear that can self-censor the mind from thinking, let alone the mouth from speaking. UreKismet and anyone else, is within their right to disregard what isn’t relevant to them at this… Read more »

wardropper
wardropper
Sep 14, 2019 5:19 AM
Reply to  Brian Steere

I reckon far too many people already know about this crime for it to be feasible to “bring all of them and their families to ruin”, and some also feel that they have nothing to lose by replacing a ridiculous narrative with the truth.
Bobby McIlvaines elderly father, for example.

Brian Steere
Brian Steere
Sep 14, 2019 9:27 AM
Reply to  wardropper

The freedom to speak freely of what is known to be false is relative to social status. The saying is that you know where power resides by what you cannot speak openly of – without penalty. 9/11 New York can be seen as many things. One is the power to execute such a synchronised series of actions. Another is to set and control the narrative of the official public record regardless and despite facts, witnesses and heavy grievance. This can seem like power because it denies justice of a true account, but it can also set such ‘power’ as a sham that has no basis but deceit, fear and insanity. The sacrifice of truth to ‘Security’ is not new. Its a kind of ‘religion’ that works backwards – as the sacrifice of truth to the fantasy of control. 9/11 New York can also be a wake up call to the… Read more »

John Thatcher
John Thatcher
Sep 12, 2019 10:49 AM
Reply to  UreKismet

I see your point about the need to bring policy after the event into the spotlight.However,questioning the ridiculous official account of events on the day and relevant actions of the various actors before during and after the event will help to show the need for close scrutiny of post 9/11 security policy.

Catte Black
Catte Black
Sep 12, 2019 12:05 PM
Reply to  UreKismet

@urekismet

That’s an anachronistic position to take up in 2019. Forget theory. We have increasing amounts of hard evidence from multiple sources that strongly suggests the 3 WTCs were brought down by controlled demolition.

That’s enough. We don’t need any more. A new inquiry is essential. Anyone who denies or deflects from this stark truth is an idiot, a coward or a shill.

Present company excepted of course.

crank
crank
Sep 12, 2019 1:49 PM
Reply to  Catte Black

Anyone who denies or deflects from this stark truth is an idiot, a coward or a shill.

There are a few out there :
Michael Tracy, Patrick Cockburn, Max Blumenthal, Glenn Greenwald……

https://twitter.com/ChrisRulon

Refraktor
Refraktor
Sep 13, 2019 1:48 AM
Reply to  Catte Black

Well said Catte and I love your tell-it-as-it-is invective. However I must demur at one point:
Those who deny or deflect are in fact actively evil and this is is useful to bear in mind and when the ad hominems begin to fly. Certain closed minded individuals think nothing of impugning the truth movement’s motives or indeed sanity. It is good and accurate to describe these as bad persons who countenance the mass murder. Saying so puts the opposition on the back foot and offers them something to think about.

Oliver
Oliver
Sep 13, 2019 5:54 PM
Reply to  Catte Black

Her Majesty’s Armed Forces must have studied the WTC attacks in 1993 (explosive a compound of urea – yeah, right) and 2001. At a senior level, in common with the militaries of every country that can produce GCSE level physics students, they know how it was done. Who and why are different questions. What lurks behind the obvious perpetrators?

    Deschutes
    Deschutes
    Sep 13, 2019 9:52 AM
    Reply to  UreKismet

    What are you doing here, reading an article about 9-11 research–and even taking time to type a lengthly comment– if you are ostensibly not interested in 9-11 and think it’s a waste of time? Your actions contradict your words. Quite contrary to your claim that research into 9-11 is a waste of time, University of Alaska researchers just published their findings into the collapse of WTC Bldg. 7. So, they obviously disagree with your opinion that researching 9-11 is ‘not worth a candle’– http://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7 “The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.” In short, you’re wrong. Its great… Read more »

    MASTER OF UNIVE
    MASTER OF UNIVE
    Sep 12, 2019 3:21 AM

    Dear Dr. Kevin Ryan, It’s an honour to read your article on offG, and an honour to meet a true American & patriot. I was formally educated in Mechanical Engineering and Metallurgy with regard to tool & die making proper. As one formally educated in Mechanical Engineering I have followed your webcasts & documentaries put out by Architects & Engineers for Truth. I salute your efforts to confront the Government of the United States of America on the 911 Controlled Demolition & Nuclear Demolition of the base of both WTC buildings. The USA Government is criminally liable for their criminal actions and they must be held accountable to the public & world for their felony acts of terrorism directed at innocent human beings for political & financial short-term gains alone. 18 years have passed since they committed these treasonous criminal acts of terrorism against the people of the world &… Read more »

    tonyopmoc
    tonyopmoc
    Sep 12, 2019 2:40 AM

    Kevin Ryan, Brave Man

    Thank You,

    Tony