On March 20, 2012, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) provided via reply to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, detailed records describing construction plans for the New York City Office of Emergency Management (OEM) “bunker”, as well as a confidential post-collapse World Trade Center (WTC) assessment by the New York City Department of Buildings.

(Download files here)

http://www.mediafire.com/?1l8ykl42ntrf9

Keiser Report - Episode 265
­In the second half of the show Max talks to independent journalist, Lars Schall, about his recently published investigation into insider trading around the 9/11 terrorist attack, as well as his pursuit of Germany’s elusive gold reserves.

AN ASIA TIMES ONLINE EXCLUSIVE INVESTIGATION

Insider trading 9/11 ... the facts laid bare
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/NC21Dj05.html

911 Blogger article
http://911blogger.com/news/2012-03-20/asia-times-online-investigation-in...

FYI! Here's the trailer for the new comprehensive DVD covering the Toronto Hearings on 9/11 from this past September, which brought together expert witnesses to present evidence contrary to the official story to a distinguished panel, who will draft a report based on the evidence submitted.

Trailer:
http://youtu.be/1rSJZqMwNoY
Preview:
http://youtu.be/RbVQvteP0rQ

Pre-order your DVD here:
http://pressfortruth.ca/dvd_dtls.php?rid=11
Spread far and wide!

Key military personnel who were responsible for protecting the U.S. against the 9/11 attacks may have been seriously hindered in their ability to respond because of a large-scale air defense exercise they were participating in when the attacks occurred. Evidence indicates that the personnel, whose responsibilities included ordering fighter jets into the air to intercept the hijacked planes, were unclear about what was "real-world" and what was "exercise." They may have been led to believe that the terrorist attacks were just simulated scenarios.

These individuals worked at the Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) in Rome, New York. Audio recordings of the operations floor at NEADS reveal staffers suggesting that the catastrophic events of September 11, 2001 could have been part of the exercise. They sometimes even made jokes and laughed about what was taking place, further indicating that they were mistaking actual events for exercise simulations. Even senior commanding officers have admitted wondering if the terrorist attacks were part of the exercise.

And while staffers sometimes apparently made clear that an event was unconnected to the exercise by referring to it as being "real-world," there is evidence that the term "real-world" may in fact be a way to describe live events played out within an exercise, perhaps involving real aircraft getting airborne, rather than just hypothetical scenarios.

Furthermore, NEADS personnel previously participated in exercises that included scenarios resembling the 9/11 attacks, such as plane hijackings and aircraft being crashed into skyscrapers in New York, and this could have increased the likelihood that they would mistake the events of September 11 for exercise simulations.

Although much remains speculative, the available evidence raises serious questions about whether the exercise at NEADS on September 11 was a deliberate tactic used to hinder skilled and dedicated professionals, thereby preventing them from stopping the terrorist attacks.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/NC21Dj05.html

March 21, 2012
By Lars Schall

Is there any truth in the allegations that informed circles made substantial profits in the financial markets in connection to the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, on the United States?

Arguably, the best place to start is by examining put options, which occurred around Tuesday, September 11, 2001, to an abnormal extent, and at the beginning via software that played a key role: the Prosecutor's Management Information System, abbreviated as PROMIS. [i]

PROMIS is a software program that seems to be fitted with almost "magical" abilities. Furthermore, it is the subject of a decades-long dispute between its inventor, Bill Hamilton, and various people/institutions associated with intelligence agencies, military and security consultancy firms. [1]

One of the "magical" capabilities of PROMIS, one has to assume, is that it is equipped with artificial intelligence and was apparently from the outset “able to simultaneously read and integrate any number of different computer programs or databases, regardless of the language in which the original programs had been written or the operating systems and platforms on which that database was then currently installed." [2]

And then it becomes really interesting:

What would you do if you possessed software that could think, understand every major language in the world, that provided peep-holes into everyone else’s computer "dressing rooms", that could insert data into computers without people’s knowledge, that could fill in blanks beyond human reasoning, and also predict what people do - before they did it? You would probably use it, wouldn't you? [3]

Granted, these capabilities sound hardly believable. In fact, the whole story of PROMIS, which Mike Ruppert develops in the course of his book Crossing the Rubicon in all its bizarre facets and turns, seems as if someone had developed a novel in the style of Philip K Dick and William Gibson. However, what Ruppert has collected about PROMIS is based on reputable sources as well as on results of personal investigations, which await a jury to take a first critical look at.

From the History Commons Groups blog:

Entries have been added to the Complete 9/11 Timeline at History Commons, which, in particular, reveal new details about events from the day of September 11.

Several entries describe how a group of fighter jets from Otis Air National Guard Base in Massachusetts were taking part in a training mission when the terrorist attacks began. Although the pilots of these jets had seen two other fighters taking off from their base in response to the hijacked Flight 11, they were unaware of the reason for the scramble. They therefore continued with their training mission--described as a "mock war scenario"--over the Atlantic Ocean.

The fighters were recalled to Otis Air Base after the base started preparing all of its fighters for takeoff. At least one of the pilots involved in the training mission soon took off again. Along with another pilot, his first task was to intercept a military cargo plane over the Atlantic. The two fighters were subsequently sent to New York, where they helped patrol the airspace over the city. Before returning to their base, they were directed to inspect a supposedly suspicious aircraft that turned out to be just a tanker plane that had been providing them with fuel.

Military personnel were also concerned about a convoy of aircraft approaching America across the Atlantic, which repeatedly failed to respond to radio communications. But when fighters intercepted the convoy, they found it was just some military planes coming back from Europe.

http://digwithin.net/2012/03/17/muslims-did-not-attack-the-u-s-on-911/

Muslims did not attack the U.S. on 9/11
Posted on March 17, 2012 by Kevin Ryan

Since September 11, 2001, the United States has initiated a number of wars in Muslim countries. These wars, which would be more correctly called massacres, have resulted in the deaths of countless innocent Muslims. In some cases, attempts have been made to present these aggressions in the guise of humanitarian efforts to promote democracy. But the limited public support for U.S. military action around the world goes back to the U.S. government claim that Muslims were responsible for 9/11. This claim is untrue and it is past time for people to recognize that fact.

There are many ways to see that Muslims were not responsible for 9/11. Author David Ray Griffin has previously made arguments in this regard.[1] As time goes on, however, more facts lead people to realize that claims of Muslim responsibility for terrorism in the U.S. should be highly suspect. These facts include that the October 2001 anthrax attacks were blamed on Muslims only to be later traced to a U.S. military facility and to non-Muslim, U.S. scientists. Moreover, a number of FBI-planned acts of terrorism since 2001 have been falsely attributed to young Muslims who were victims of appalling acts of entrapment by the FBI.[2]

According to the official account of 9/11, nineteen young Arab Muslims were responsible for the entirety of the mass murder that day. The FBI accused these young men within 72 hours of the attacks and, although the list changed slightly at first, it has remained the same since shortly after the attacks. To support the accusations, U.S. authorities pointed to passports that were found under implausible circumstances, luggage containing unbelievably convenient documents, and other dubious evidence.

Launching the U.S. Terror War: the CIA, 9/11, Afghanistan, and Central Asia
(full paper is available at the Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus http://japanfocus.org/-Peter_Dale-Scott/3723)

Bush’s Terror War and the Fixing of Intelligence

On September 11, 2001, within hours of the murderous 9/11 attacks, Bush, Rumsfeld, and Cheney had committed America to what they later called the “War on Terror.” It should more properly, I believe, be called the “Terror War,” one in which terror has been directed repeatedly against civilians by all participants, both states and non-state actors. It should also be seen as part of a larger, indeed global, process in which terror has been used against civilians in interrelated campaigns by all major powers, including China in Xinjiang and Russia in Chechnya, as well as the United States.2 Terror war in its global context should perhaps be seen as the latest stage of the age-long secular spread of transurban civilization into areas of mostly rural resistance -- areas where conventional forms of warfare, for either geographic or cultural reasons, prove inconclusive.

Terror War was formally declared by George W. Bush on the evening of September 11, 2001, with his statement to the American nation that "we will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them."3 But the notion that Bush’s terror war was in pursuit of actual terrorists lost credibility in 2003, when it was applied to Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, a country known to have been targeted by terrorists but not to have harbored them.4 It lost still more credibility with the 2005 publication in Britain of the so-called Downing Street memo, in which the head of the British intelligence service MI6 reported after a visit to Washington in 2002 that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam Hussein, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."5 False stories followed in due course linking Iraq to WMD, anthrax, and Niger yellowcake (uranium).

This essay will demonstrate that before 9/11 a small element inside the CIA’s Bin Laden Unit and related agencies, the so-called Alec Station Group, were also busy, “fixing” intelligence by suppressing it, in a way which, accidentally or deliberately, enabled the Terror War. They did so by withholding evidence from the FBI before 9/11 about two of the eventual alleged hijackers on 9/11, Khalid Al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, thus ensuring that the FBI could not surveil the two men or their colleagues.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/agencies-poorly-tra...

Agencies poorly track FOIA requests, report says
By Ed O'Keefe

Obama made government transparency concerns a top priority of his early days as president. (J. Scott Applewhite - AP) Eleven of 17 Cabinet-level agencies fail to fully comply with federal law requiring complete inventories of public records requests, and most large agencies earn a subpar grade for records management, according to a new congressional report.

The report, set for release Thursday by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is meant to draw attention to government transparency issues during this year’s Sunshine Week, an annual event designed to raise awareness about access to public records.

The report does not probe how often agencies grant or deny Freedom of Information Act requests, but instead focuses on a key facet of FOIA law requiring agencies to track every request made by people or organizations for public information. The committee, chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), asked 100 large and small federal agencies to provide information on their FOIA tracking systems. Each agency received a letter grade based on a seven-point criteria, including whether agencies produced digitized records that included the date of a request, the name of the requester and a description of the information requested.

“A number of agencies demonstrated that they are able to track basic information about requests, while others either would not or could not provide such information as requested,” the report said. The fact that several agencies “struggle to demonstrate transparency about very basic information is troubling and necessitates greater scrutiny.”

Under question from Sen. Sessions at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey indicated that "international permission," rather than Congressional approval, provided a 'legal basis' for military action by the United States.

http://youtu.be/5zNwOeyuG84

FBI Director: I Have to Check to See If Obama Has the Right to Assassinate Americans On U.S. Soil

Who is Ken, or Kenneth, Wainstein?

Monday, 5. March 2012

9/11 Questions Bubble Up in the Media

On Friday February 24, Boiling Frogs posted an article titled “Media Sleepwalks, While History is in the Making.” Three articles had come out the week before, one in the London Daily Telegraph and two in the Florida-based Broward Bulldog, raising important new questions about the crimes of September 11, 2001 and the quality of the government’s investigation. In particular, these articles discussed new information and questions coming from former Senator Robert Graham, questions relating to secret documents that Graham described as running at odds with past government assertions in the 9/11 investigation. These three articles also raised new questions about the role of the government of Saudi Arabia.

The Feb 24 Boiling Frogs post discussed those three articles, and noted that there hadn’t been a single article in the mainstream media on the issues they raised, even though a week had gone by. The post then asked if a valid prediction market could be established for the date when the media would wake up.

Political prediction markets have a very interesting history. One of the difficulties in having a successful market, a market that people trust, is related to a similar issue in futures markets. Futures contracts need to be specified carefully and clearly, and remain free of ambiguous legal interpretation.