Tag: building 7

How the CIA Deliberately Allowed Two 9/11 Hijackers Into the US

Tucker Carlson has a new series coming out called “The 9/11 Files”, the first episode of which I stumbled across today on Rumble. It covers how the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was tracking two of the alleged hijackers of American Airlines Flight 77, the plane flown into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

The CIA tracked Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar to a meeting of Al Qaeda operatives in Kuala Lumpar, Malaysia, in early 2000 and knew they had visas to enter the US but “failed” to notify the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The FBI also “failed” to learn about the two operatives being in the country despite the pair renting a room in the home of an FBI informant.

The first episode of “The 9/11 Files”, published today, is titled “The CIA’s Secret Mission Gone Wrong“. Here’s the video description:

A former FBI agent who was embedded in the CIA’s Bin Laden unit, Mark Rossini, claims the CIA was fully aware that the 9/11 hijackers were in the United States planning an attack. Rather than inform the FBI, the CIA tried to recruit two of the hijackers for a “false-flag” operation, which quickly spiraled out of control. The failed mission raises urgent questions about government secrecy, intelligence failures, and what really happened before 9/11.

Keep reading

Appeals Court Throws Out Plea Deal for 9/11 Mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammad

In 2024, The Gateway Pundit reported that then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin announced the revocation of a plea deal previously reached with Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, the alleged mastermind behind the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, along with two of his co-conspirators, Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarak Bin Attash and Mustafa Ahmed Adam al Hawsawi.

This decision effectively reinstated the possibility of the death penalty for the trio.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that the plea deal, reached between the Convening Authority for Military Commissions and the defendants and signed by retired Brig. Gen. Susan K. Escallier, was intended to ‘mitigate’ the legal repercussions for the accused while allowing them to avoid capital punishment.

On Friday, a federal appeals court upheld Austin’s decision to undo the plea deal.

Fox News reports:

A divided federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., on Friday tossed out an agreement that would have allowed 9/11 terror mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to plead guilty in another failed effort to end a years-long legal saga surrounding the military prosecution of men held at Guantánamo Bay.

The 2-1 D.C. Circuit appeals court decision upheld then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s decision to undo the plea deal approved by military lawyers and senior Pentagon staff.

The deal would have carried life without parole sentences for Mohammed and two co-defendants, potentially taking capital punishment off the table.

The original plea deal garnered outrage from various political factions and advocacy groups who argued that any leniency shown to those involved in the 9/11 attacks undermines justice for the nearly 3,000 victims and their families.

In making his decision, Austin wrote, “I have determined that, in light of the significance of the decision to enter into pre-trial agreements with the accused in the above-referenced case, responsibility for such a decision should rest with me as the superior convening authority under the Military Commissions Act of 2009.”

“Effective immediately, I hereby withdraw your authority in the above-referenced case to enter into a pre-trial agreement and reserve such authority to myself. Effective immediately, in the exercise of my authority, I hereby withdraw from the three pre-trial agreements that you signed on July 31, 2024 in the above-referenced case,” he added.

Keep reading

Senator Demands 9/11 Investigation Into ‘Controlled Demolition’ of Building 7

One would have been hard-pressed to imagine, just a few years ago, a sitting United States senator suggesting that the Building 7 collapse may have been a “controlled demolition.” 

“What would you like to know about September 11, the official story there, Senator?” podcaster Benny Johnson prompted.

Sen. Ron Johnson’s (R-Wisc.) answer:

Well, start with Building 7. Again, I don’t know if you can find structural engineers other than the ones that have the corrupt investigations inside NIST that would say that that thing didn’t come down in any other way than a controlled demolition… You just look at that… 

There’s an awful lot of questions. Who ordered the removal and the destruction of all that evidence? Totally contrary to any other firefighting investigation procedures. I mean, who ordered that? Who is in charge? I think there’s some basic information. Where’s all the documentation from the NIST investigation.

Now, there are a host of questions that I want and I will be asking, quite honestly, now that my eyes have been opened up.

Keep reading

9/11: The American illness which still has no cure

It came and went almost unnoticed. Given that 9/11 is without any doubt the biggest travesty of U.S. justice in the history of this young country – and perhaps its greatest betrayal of its own people – this was not surprising. While Harris and Trump made their respects and a few articles were written which just re-hack the same talking points, an entire nation bleeds. 9/11 is a phenomenon which cannot be compared really to anything. It can almost be called an illness when you pause to consider how it came about and how it has succeeded in never being examined or properly investigated to protect George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Condo Rice and possibly scores of secret service agents who were in on it. Yes, 9/11 is really an illness which has no cure. Only the very few lunatics in white jackets who created it are immune from it.

How do most Americans cope with dealing with terrorists flying planes into the World Trade Centre in New York City? And then having to grasp the mere notion that it was conducted entirely with the knowledge and support of their own elite? The answer is they don’t. Most Americans simply close their eyes and ears and refuse to see and hear anything such is the extent of their adoration of their own country and their stoic refusal to face a reality which they have indulged themselves for over 300 years in refusing to believe: that the ruling elites of Europe in the 17th century who manipulated the working classes for their own rotten needs simply transferred the business model via the Pilgrim Fathers when America was built. The idea that America was built as a ‘solution’ to the depravity of Europe is a farce. It is literally a sick joke.

On the 23rd anniversary of 9/11, the two scenarios that the very, very few Americans embrace, if they care to, are equally appalling. Either George W Bush and his cronies became aware of an imminent terrorist attack and simply let it happen; or worse they were part of its planning from the beginning and spent months preparing each and every detail.

Keep reading

Remember when Matt Taibbi Called 9/11 Truthers “Hopelessly Stupid”?

Icame out as a truther in 2015 with my 9/11 novel, Locus Amoenus. It wasn’t an easy decision. I anticipated being called “clinically insane,” a “dickwad,” promoting “rank steaming bullshit” by the likes of Matt Taibbi.

Among other notable left-leaning 9/11 truth debunkers, such as Chris Hayes and Noam Chomsky, Taibbi stands out in my memory as being particular angry, nasty, and very sure of himself.

As Taibbi writes in Rollingstone in September 2006,

9/11 Truth followers will doubtless argue that I am ignoring the mountains of scientific evidence proving that the Towers could not have collapsed as a result of the plane crashes alone… To which I’ll have to answer: you’re right. I am ignoring it. You idiots. Even if it were not the rank steaming bullshit my few scientist friends assure me that it is, none of that stuff would prove anything.

Despite his fairly recent road-to-Damascus conversion, finally realizing that “left” journalism has lost its way — and now supports the US Empire, the surveillance state and the censorship industrial complex — Taibbi hasn’t, insofar as I know, reflected much upon the deeds of his earlier self, when he was a rabid attacker of those who would report a few facts about how gravity works.

I want to point out that, in Taibbi’s infamous above-mention 2006 article, “The Idiocy Behind the ‘9/11 Truth’ Movement,” his main “gripe” is that truthers aren’t conspiracy theorists: he complains that, for the most part, they just analyze the physical evidence pointing to the use of incendiaries, and they do not offer, a “concrete theory of what happened, who ordered what and when they ordered it, and why,” which, of course, the engineers examining the physical evidence could not do, no more than the coroner who does the autopsy in a murder case could do.

As late as July 2019, Taibbi was still bashing 9/11 “conspiracy theorists” by associating the movement’s investigators, who had Engineering or Physics PhDs, with “Flat Earthers” and “Moon Landing Deniers” (yawn).

But within a year’s time, after he got locked down during CoVid, he started noting how the media censored commonsense notions about how best to deal with infectious disease. This time, he started questioning the official narrative. Not long thereafter, this foul-mouthed enfant terrible of journalism, this wannabe Hunter S. Thompson, became the target of his own kind of snark from his former colleagues.

No longer with Rollingstone, by September 11, 2021, Taibbi was making the connections between the “War on Terror” and the “War on CoVid.” Two years later, he repeated such observations again on Racket News.

Now, it seems to be clear to Taibbi why 9/11 happened.

Although Taibbi is doing useful work these days exposing how government and Big Tech colluded to censor US citizens, he could say a thing or two about that other kind of censorship — the most powerful kind: name-calling, dismissiveness, bullying. No one wants to be ridiculed in public. No one wants to be put in that hated group, the Truther, the Anti-Vaxxer, the Anti-Semite, the TransPhobe.

Taibbi was very effective at getting people to stay silent about an important historical event. I can’t help but speculate that, had more people been made aware of the 9/11 cover up, more people would have been cynical about government authority and fewer people might have taken the shot.

When is Taibbi going to admit that the 9/11 truthers were right? It’s not too late for an apology.

Keep reading

9/11: Whodunnit? and Why It Matters to the Peace Movement

“I have chosen this time and this place to discuss a topic on which ignorance too often abounds and the truth is too rarely perceived — yet it is the most important topic on earth: world peace . . .”— PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY, AMERICAN UNIVERSITY, JUNE 10, 1963

Sixty years later it behooves us more than ever to penetrate the tenacious ignorance of which Kennedy spoke. To honor my friend and colleague, TRANSCEND member Prof. Graeme MacQueen, who passed away in April, this editorial addresses topics he was passionate about, namely peace, justice and truth, in particular 9/11 truth.

If we’re not willing to open our minds to the abundant evidence refuting the narrative, fed to us mere minutes after the heinous crimes of 9/11 unfolded before our eyes, that a band of foreign militants from the Middle East was solely responsible for those crimes, then we risk continuing to fall prey to propaganda leading to unending wars and suffering.

Johan Galtung introduced me to Graeme at a 2011 TRANSCEND symposium in North Carolina. 9/11 was not on the formal agenda, but came up in side conversations as the 10-year anniversary approached. Galtung has always promoted open dialog on challenging topics, bucking the penchant of academic institutions and major media platforms to ignore dissenting views on 9/11 and dismiss them as crazy conspiracy theories. He thus proposed adding a session on 9/11 to the symposium and opening it to the general public. Three of us presented our views, followed by Q and A.

Galtung accepted the official narrative that 9/11 was perpetrated by foreign Muslim extremists, viewing it as blow-back from the many injustices the US had inflicted on the Middle East. He called it a public execution of 3 buildings (World Trade Center 1 and 2, and the Pentagon) that symbolized the US military-financial complex. 

Graeme and I enumerated unexplained anomalies pointing to complicity of key agents within the US Government and cast doubt on the culpability of Al-Qaeda operatives. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, alleged mastermind of 9/11, confessed involvement only after being subjected to prolonged torture via waterboarding, while videos of Osama bin Laden claiming credit for the attacks look suspiciously fake.

We all agreed, however, along with most peace activists, that the US response to the events of 9/11 was reprehensible: declaring the unending war on terror, fomenting widespread Islamophobia, curtailing civil liberties, decades-long military incursions in Afghanistan and Iraq that ruined both countries and cost countless lives. The US leadership justified its violent response by the fear, outrage and desire for revenge that swept across much of the nation, horrified at the shock and awe it had witnessed that fateful day. How could that have been prevented?

Imagine what our world might look like if the propaganda machine set in motion the morning of 9/11 had failed. What if most journalists, commentators, engineers, pilots, firefighters, police, and politicians on mainstream media had pressed for answers to valid questions, like:

How could damage and fires on the upper floors have caused both twin towers to explode and disappear into their footprints? How could World Trade Center 7, a third skyscraper not hit by a plane, have imploded symmetrically at free fall speed? How could an alleged hijacker who flunked flight school on small planes have executed a harrowing maneuver to ram a passenger jet into the Pentagon going 500 mph at ground level? How did the US, with its hundreds of billions in defense spending, fail to defend the nerve center of its military headquarters in the nation’s capital? 

Once it was announced hijacked planes were crashing into buildings, why did Secret Service agents allow President Bush to remain in a Florida classroom with children, leaving them vulnerable to attack? Who made money on a significant increase in stock market betting right before 9/11 that prices of American and United Airline stocks would drop? 

What if honest eye-witness journalists, who in the morning had reported explosions both before and during the destruction of the towers, had continued to develop that thread and ask deeper questions throughout the day and following days, rather than being diverted by select experts and pundits who silenced the “explosion” theme, supplanting it with unproven assertions that Osama bin Laden did it.

Had these questions — many raised also by 9/11 victims’ family members — been relentlessly pursued, the flimsy tale of Muslim extremists from remote parts of the world with no ties to any government being the lone perpetrators of this apocalyptic theatrical display would have soon disintegrated.

Keep reading

Ex-FBI agents accuse top CIA, FBI officials of 9/11 coverup; CIA said to use Saudis, others for illegal domestic spy operations

Weeks before 9/11, an angry New York FBI agent nearly “came over the table” at CIA officials who were blocking him from obtaining intelligence about two al Qaeda terrorists who would soon take part in hijacking an American Airlines passenger jet and crashing it into the Pentagon.

“Someone is going to die,” the counterterrorism agent wrote in a bitter email shortly after the 2001 encounter.

That astonishing account, and many others, are contained in a sworn declaration by Donald Canestraro, an investigator for the Office of Military Commissions, part of the Department of Defense’s Military Commissions Defense Organization. It is dated July 20, 2021.

Canestraro said in a brief interview with Florida Bulldog that he is part of the defense team for Guantanamo detainee Ammar al-Baluchi, a Pakistani citizen who is awaiting trial with four other men accused of planning the 9/11 attacks. His declaration includes the results of his interviews with 11 ex-FBI agents, 2 ex-CIA agents, a CNN investigative journalist, former deputy National Security Advisor Richard Clarke and former Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), co-chair of Congress’s Joint Inquiry into 9/11.

The 22-page declaration, first obtained by the national security website Spytalk, is not confidential, but rather it’s marked CUI – Controlled Unclassified Information. The Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency defines CUI as “government created or owned information that requires safeguarding or dissemination controls consistent with applicable laws, regulations and government wide policies.”

Keep reading

No, Saudi Arabia did NOT do 9/11

The bombshell 911 news this past week, is that a freshly-published court filing from Jul 2021, has revealed at least two of the 19 alleged “hijackers” may have been recruited by the CIA.

Now this isn’t exactly “news”, after all it has long since been established that the CIA, FBI and/or any other US alphabet agencies simply must have been involved. It couldn’t have happened without their involvement.

Unfortunately, but not unexpectedly, the new release doesn’t go that far. Instead, the testimony from Donald C Canestraro Declaration – former lead investigator for the Office of Military Commissions – discusses the “intelligence failures that led to 9/11”, while focusing mainly on the “hijackers” and their backgrounds.

According to a report in Grayzone, the court filing relies on anonymous testimony from “high-ranking CIA and FBIA officials”:

…the filing is a 21-page declaration by Don Canestraro, a lead investigator for the Office of Military Commissions, the legal body overseeing the cases of 9/11 defendants. It summarizes classified government discovery disclosures, and private interviews he conducted with anonymous high-ranking CIA and FBI officials.

That should be a red flag, right there. Rather like Sy Hersh’s recent “revelations” on Nord Stream 2, any use of “anonymous insider sources” should always set off your internal bullshit alarm. It’s more likely to be a limited hangout than anything else.

In fact, any discussion of the “hijackers” at all should engage your inner sceptic.

Reality check: The hijackers’ names were supplied by the FBI. Virtually everything we know about those men came from US intelligence sources or the 9/11 Commission Report.

Keep reading