9/11: a 7-Man Job
Is that true? Maybe.
But we didn't learn about the conspiracies to cook the Iraqi wmd intelligence, or to spy on Americans, or any of the many other Bushco conspiracies until years later.
Moreover, to anyone who knows how covert military operations work, it is obvious that segmentation on a "need-to-know basis", along with deference to command hierarchy, means that a couple of top dogs can call the shots and most people helping won't even know the big picture.
I Can't Hear You
It has now been shown that a handful of people were responsible for willfully ignoring the evidence that Iraq lacked weapons of mass destruction. See, for, example this article. Indeed, Iraq was not the first time the U.S. has ignored or faked intelligence in order to justify war.
The facts are also clear that it was also obvious to U.S. intelligence that 9/11 was going to happen on or around the date it happened.
So how many people would it have taken to ignore the intelligence that hijackers were going to attack? How hard would it have been for a handful of top-level administration officials to stick their fingers in their ears, say "nah nah nah" (like kids do when they don't want to hear what you're saying), and let it happen?
Its Happened Before
As confirmed by a former Italian Prime Minister, an Italian judge, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence, NATO, with the help of U.S. and foreign special forces, carried out terror bombings in Italy and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism. As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: "You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security."
In the early 1950s, agents of an Israeli terrorist cell operating in Egypt planted bombs in several buildings, including U.S. diplomatic facilities, then left behind "evidence" implicating the Arabs as the culprits (one of the bombs detonated prematurely, allowing the Egyptians to identify the bombers). Israel's Defense Minister was brought down by the scandal, along with the entire Israeli government. See also this confirmation.
But not in the U.S., right? Well, recently declassified documents show that in the 1960's, the American Joint Chiefs of Staff signed off on a plan to blow up AMERICAN airplanes (using an elaborate plan involving the switching of airplanes), and also to commit terrorist acts on American soil, and then to blame it on the Cubans in order to justify an invasion of Cuba. See this ABC news report, the official documents, and watch this interview with the former Washington Investigative Producer for ABC's World News Tonight with Peter Jennings (click link entitled "Joint Chiefs Guilty-Northwoods").
But that was a plan that – while it would have involved a large conspiracy - was never carried out, right? True.
But as shown by this BBC special (which contains interviews with some of the key players), it is probable that America knew of the Japanese plan to attack Pearl Harbor -- down to the exact date of the attack -- and allowed it to happen to justify America's entry into World War II. The case for foreknowledge is even more definitively made by this short essay by a highly-praised historian summarizing some of the key points (the historian, a World War II veteran, actually agreed with this strategy for getting America into the war, and so does not have any axe to grind). According to top WWII scholars, the Pearl Harbor conspiracy involved hundreds of military personnel. And -- most stunning -- the FDR administration took numerous affirmative steps to ensure that the Japanese attack would be successful
These are just a few of many examples of what are called "false flag operations", where governments attack their own people or allies – then blame it on their enemy – in order to justify a war against that enemy. There are many more examples from recent history.
In all of these cases, more than a handful of people were involved in planning, funding and carrying out the attacks. And yet no one spilled the beans or – if someone did – they were not believed.
But 9/11 Was Much Bigger
But 9/11 would have involved a much bigger conspiracy theory, which – unlike the examples above – would have been too big to keep quiet. Right?
NATO's Italian terror campaign would have involved quite a few people.
Pearl Harbor, according to top historians, involved hundreds of people.
9/11, in contrast, could have involved fewer people.
Indeed, one could argue that it involved ONE person. Let's say -- just as an example randomly pulled out of a hat -- Vice President Dick Cheney.
Cheney was apparently in charge of the entire U.S. government’s counter-terrorism program prior to 9/11, and in charge of ALL 5 of the war games which occurred on 9/11, and Mr. Cheney also coordinated the government's "response" to the attacks. See this CNN article; and this essay. Being in charge of all counter-terrorism in the U.S., Cheney was probably the person who moved up major war games so that they would overlap with games and terror drills already planned for 9/11. And see this interview of the former head of the Star Wars program and a former Air Force colonel.
And Cheney is the one who monitored flight 77 for many miles as it approached the Pentagon and -- when a military man asked "do the orders still stand?" -- Cheney responded affirmatively:
"The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Watch the video for yourself.
In addition, a former Los Angeles police department investigator, whose newsletter is read by 45 members of congress, both the house and senate intelligence committees, and professors at more than 40 universities around the world, claims that Cheney was in charge of the entire military and the secret service during the 9/11 attacks, that the secret service has its own communications system which is parallel to and can even cut into normal military communication channels.
Most people acknowledge that Cheney is one of the most powerful vice presidents in history. In addition, Cheney has a long-standing history of falsifying and manipulating facts and taking brutal actions in furtherance of his imperial goals. For example, in the 70's -- Cheney was instrumental in generating fake intelligence exaggerating the Soviet threat in order to undermine coexistence between the U.S. and Soviet Union, which conveniently justified huge amounts of cold war spending. See also this article. And the former director of the CIA accused Cheney of overseeing torture policies. Colin Powell's former chief of staff also stated that Dick Cheney is guilty of war crimes. I'm not trying to be long-winded about Mr. Cheney's resume. I'm simply pointing out that Mr. Cheney seems to have the ability to make large U.S. policy decisions and take sweeping actions -- and to order others to do so -- without much problem.
Now, of course, there was probably more than one person involved in this hypothetical example. Mr. Cheney would probably have had 1 guy manning the secret service communications system and another guy sitting at a computer inserting false radar blips onto air traffic controllers' screens. But this demonstrates that you didn’t need thousands to pull off 9/11.
Let’s take it one step further. How many people would it have taken to demolish World Trade Center buildings 1, 2 and 7 with bombs? Hundreds? Thousands?
How about 3.
Specifically, there was plenty of opportunity to plant bombs in the Twin Towers. By way of example only:
Bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly and inexplicably removed from the Twin Towers in the weeks preceding 9/11
There was a power down in the Twin Towers on the weekend before 9/11, security cameras were shut down, and many workers ran around busily doing things unobserved
The Twin Towers had been evacuated a number of times in the weeks preceding 9/11
And, as an interesting coincidence, a Bush-linked company ran security at the trade centers
So here's a potential scenario:
One guy in the Bush-linked security company lets in the bomb-setters;
A 2-man crew of demolition experts sets the radio-controlled explosives while everyone is out of the building;
And the same crew detonates the explosives using a radio transceiver.
That adds only 3 more guys.
So, we're now up to perhaps 7 people total to pull off 9/11 (Cheney, another guy making sure intelligence warnings aren't acted on, the secret service agent and the the radar guy, the security guy and the two-man demolition crew).
9/11 Commission Cover-Up
Indeed, there is already documentation of a cover-up about 9/11. By who? Well, let's start with the 9/11 Commission itself.
Years after the 9/11 Commission issued its report, governmental whistleblowers have leaked the following facts:
• The Pentagon and Norad intentionally lied about what happened on 9/11 (free subscription required), and the 9/11 Commission knew this, but concealed this fact from the American people
• The U.S. government was tracking many of the 9/11 hijackers long before 9/11, and the 9/11 Commission was informed of this, but hid this fact from the American people
These cover-ups were carried out by the Commissioners, their staff, and the Pentagon, Norad and other military personnel directly involved in the relevant acts on and before 9/11, numbering collectively in the low hundreds.
So a cover-up regarding 9/11 has already been established.
How did they Keep Them Quiet?
Jason Bourne (the fictional character in the Bourne movies) kept people quiet by offering 2 alternatives: He told them that he'd pay them alot of money if they cooperated; or he'd kill them if they didn't.
Bourne had his own code of honor and was a good guy. If the 9/11 masterminds wanted to keep people quiet, they would probably be alot more ruthless, as they apparently do not follow Mr. Bourne's code of honor.
In addition, there already have been whistleblowers who have come forward. See, for example, this short essay. But these whistleblowers have been wholly ignored by the 9/11 Commission and the media.
Indeed, famed Pentagon Papers whistleblower Ellsberg has confirmed the media's censorship about 9/11:
Ellsberg seemed hardly surprised that today's American mainstream broadcast media has so far failed to take [9/11 whistleblower Sibel] Edmonds up on her offer, despite the blockbuster nature of her allegations.Because the whistleblowers who have come forward have been completely ignored, other whistleblowers have been discouraged from risking it all to come forward. For example, 9/11 family member Patty Casazza stated:
As Edmonds has also alluded, Ellsberg pointed to the New York Times, who "sat on the NSA spying story for over a year" when they "could have put it out before the 2004 election, which might have changed the outcome."
"I am confident that there is conversation inside the Government as to 'How do we deal with Sibel?'" contends Ellsberg. "The first line of defense is to ensure that she doesn't get into the media. I think any outlet that thought of using her materials would go to to the government and they would be told 'don't touch this . . . .'"
"part of the problem with testifying ... as someone who's working for one of the agencies, is that, they have to be careful with state secrets, what they reveal. And, in order to be a whistle-blower, and not be retaliated against, most whistle-blowers need to be subpoenaed, cause then their co-workers, and those who might retaliate against them, know that under penalty of, ya know, law, they could be... um... ya know, accused of being traitors and what not, and put in jail, or executed. So, most whistle-blowers were... did not come forward on the basis of what happened to Sibel Edmonds [since the 9/11 Commission refused to subpoena her or make her testimony public].Moreover, many of the people who carried out 9/11 probably did so for ideological reasons -- they actually believed that killing 3,000 Americans was justified in a "ends justify the means" way as an excuse to carry out their agenda. Never underestimate the conviction of an idealogue.
These people would not need to be quieted. Even after the disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, torture, spying, etc., they probably still believe they did the right thing by creating the justification for the administration's policies. They would thus have no desire to speak out.
Just because no one you know is this extreme an idealogue doesn't mean people like that don't exist. There are people who will go to their grave believing that their monstrous crimes were the acts of patriots.
As famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg said:
It is a commonplace that "you can't keep secrets in Washington" or "in a democracy, no matter how sensitive the secret, you're likely to read it the next day in the New York Times." These truisms are flatly false. They are in fact cover stories, ways of flattering and misleading journalists and their readers, part of the process of keeping secrets well. Of course eventually many secrets do get out that wouldn't in a fully totalitarian society. But the fact is that the overwhelming majority of secrets do not leak to the American public. This is true even when the information withheld is well known to an enemy and when it is clearly essential to the functioning of the congressional war power and to any democratic control of foreign policy. The reality unknown to the public and to most members of Congress and the press is that secrets that would be of the greatest import to many of them can be kept from them reliably for decades by the executive branch, even though they are known to thousands of insiders.Indeed, a BBC documentary shows that:
there was "a planned coup in the USA in 1933 by a group of right-wing American businessmen . . . . The coup was aimed at toppling President Franklin D Roosevelt with the help of half-a-million war veterans. The plotters, who were alleged to involve some of the most famous families in America, (owners of Heinz, Birds Eye, Goodtea, Maxwell Hse & George Bush’s Grandfather, Prescott) believed that their country should adopt the policies of Hitler and Mussolini to beat the great depression."Moreover, "the tycoons told General Butler the American people would accept the new government because they controlled all the newspapers."
Have you ever heard of this conspiracy before? It was certainly a very large one. And if the conspirators controlled the newspapers then, how much worse is it today with media consolidation?
Were more than 7 guys involved? Probably. But it could still have involved many less people than were needed to carry out NATO's Italian terror campaign or to hide the fact that an entire fleet of Japanese ships was sailing towards Pearl Harbor.
Contrary to popular misperception, conspiracies are not that uncommon. Just because the government tries to claim that conspiracy theories are crazy does not mean that they don't exist.
There are, to be sure, crazy people who believe that everything is a conspiracy, which it isn't. However, it is just as crazy to believe that nothing is a conspiracy as it is to believe that everything is.
Indeed, the commonly-parroted statement that there are no conspiracies is propaganda spread to protect the criminals who carry out false flag operations, and just may be the biggest conspiracy of them all.