Obviously, some of the information in this article is questionable as far as the 9/11 attacks are concerned. The reason I'm posting it is because it speaks of the incompetence of most "Al-Qaeda" operatives, and the fact that 9/11 required "new levels of competence" that they simply weren't capable of. "Al-Qaeda" CAN NOT make the United States military stand down. "Al-Qaeda" CAN NOT order the FBI to stop investigating the Bin Ladens. "Al-Qaeda" CAN NOT order Omar Sheikh of the Pakistani ISI to wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammad Atta. "Al-Qaeda" CAN NOT stack the deck of a so-called "Independent" Commission in favor of the Bush Administration. In other words, the complexity of the 9/11 attacks speaks VOLUMES.

These recent transparent charades are opening a window into minds that are otherwise closed.

We need to challenge all those who doubt Al-Qaeda:

If you don't buy this, why do you buy the official fairy tale?

np

the public has to be made aware of the fact that $2 trillion of their money has been spent to fight so called "al Qaeda". that's $2'000'000'000'000.00 dollars just to 'combat' a bunch of arab cavemen that would be a small town's gang by western standards. Because they 'claimed' on their bad quality home videos to have orchestrated the largest and most successful terror attack the planet has ever experienced.

Generations of Americans will have to work for the Chinese, Japanese, Saudi Arabians and the other creditors to pay down the $2 trillion, because of a grainy old VHS home video, that any IDIOT can recognize as a lie.

Thanks to Dubya, to Rummy, to Condi etc. for this decision.

Jon asks "What if the 9/11 Truth Movement had a "Statement Of Principles" as it were...?"
-- --

What are you getting at, Jon?

Are you talking about

purpose?
intent?
tactics and strategies?
"accepted facts"?
political foundations?

I generally like the idea of where you're headed (I think), but draw me a map.

Jon, I like the "Statement of Principles" idea. Did you have in mind a collaborative effort? Let's figure out what we all agree on and go from there. Well, that may be a little hard, but worth a try.

A statement of principles would be a logical counterpart to what i think the Truth Movement desperately needs: Unison.

911blogger's homepage has a long list of links, the amount of which demonstrates the sparodic nature of 911 truth activism.

If every site and every blog were to pool its resources and unite into one orginisation which was modded by the big players in the game, then not only would we gain more noteriety, influence and power as an orginised unit, we would be able to do things like quash the aspects of 911 truth that hurt the movement (no plane obsession, anti semitism etc), as there would be a better feeling of community.

My personal idea is what seems to have been followed by st911 with their 'journals' page. I forsaw something that was essentially wikipedia but only for 911. Articles about every aspect of the topic that anyone could edit, with their editing privilages based on other credentials decided by the sites community. The end result would hopefully be a consensual, moderated, streamlined database of all the awful truth that we know about 911, and wen new stuff came it could be added to this archive.

If we had a centralised, coordinated site that had all this information on it, as well as it functioning as the epicenter of activism (the definitive place where rallys, protests, and other campagns would be organised) - a single place where all the 911 traffic went through..

wed have much more power and influence if this kind of unison could be brought about.

This is how the hi-level psy-ops work. You appease the global terror skeptics with "news" about how global terror is "not what we've been told."

But you riddle the article with "facts" that clearly reinforce the concept of this phenomenon, as well as the validity of it's "leaders" and how it all relates to an increasingly debunked official story.

The subtitle should have read: Before 9/11, Osama bin LadenÂ’s group was small and fractious. How Washington helped to build it into a phony global threat.

If they can make the masses think LIHOP is a big deal, they can sell it as "the big, uncovered secret." When it's really nothing, compared to reality.

It appears that IntelCenter is now the clearinghouse of bin Laden LLC productions.

The CIA is apparently contracting the bin laden tapes to intelcenter, run by a guy named Ben Venzke. Google those names & see what you get. He's getting rich off of the al Qaeda myth, that's for sure.

It's interesting how their calling intelcenter's bin laden production a videotape, when it's merely a recorded voice and a still picture of bin laden next to a still picture of zarqawi.

I can't wait to hear Tarpley's take on this sythetic BS....

You have all pretty much guessed my intentions for a "Statement Of Principles", or a "Declaration of Truth"... something that binds us, and makes us one.

Two of the aircraft exceeded their software limits on 9/11.

The Boeing 757 and 767 are equipped with fully autonomous flight capability, they are the only two Boeing commuter aircraft capable of fully autonomous flight. They can be programmed to take off, fly to a destination and land, completely without a pilot at the controls.

They are intelligent planes, and have software limits pre set so that pilot error cannot cause passenger injury. Though they are physically capable of high g maneuvers, the software in their flight control systems prevents high g maneuvers from being performed via the cockpit controls. They are limited to approximately 1.5 g's, I repeat, one and one half g's. This is so that a pilot mistake cannot end up breaking grandma's neck.

No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature.

The plane that hit the Pentagon approached or reached its actual physical limits, military personnel have calculated that the Pentagon plane pulled between five and seven g's in its final turn.

The same is true for the second aircraft to impact the WTC.

There is only one way this can happen.

As well as fully autonomous flight capability, the 767 and 757 are the ONLY COMMUTER PLANES MADE BY BOEING THAT CAN BE FLOWN VIA REMOTE CONTROL. It is a feature that is standard to all of them, all 757's and 767's can do it. The purpose for this is if there is a problem with the pilots, Norad can fly the planes to safe destinations via remote. Only in this flight mode can those craft exceed their software limits and perform to their actual physical limits because a pre existing emergency situation is assumed if this mode of flight is used.

Terrorists in fact did not fly those planes, it is totally and completely impossible for those planes to have been flown in such a manner from the cockpit. Those are commuter aircraft, not F-16's and their software knows it.

Another piece of critical evidence: the voice recorders came up blank.

The flight recorders that were recovered had tape that was undamaged inside, but it was blank. There is only one way this can happen on a 757 or 767. When the aircraft are commandeered via remote control, the microphones that go to the cockpit voice recorder are re routed to the people doing the remote controlling, so that the recording of what happened in the cockpit gets made in a presumably safer place. But due to a glitch in the system on a 757/767, rather than shutting off when the mic is redirected the voice recorder keeps running. The voice recorders use what is called a continuous loop tape, which automatically re passes itself past the erase and record heads once every half hour, so after a half hour of running with the microphones redirected, the tape will be blank. Just like the recovered tapes were. Yet more proof that no pilot flew those planes in the last half hour.

Eight of the hijackers who were on those planes called up complaining that they were still alive. I'd bet you never heard about our foreign minister flying to Morocco and issuing an official apology to the accused, did you? No, terrorists did not fly those planes, plastic knives and box cutters were in fact too ridiculous to be true. Any of the remaining accused have certainly been sought out and killed by now.

Our information IS controlled

The cell phone calls from the aircraft could not have happened. I am a National Security Agency trained Electronic Warfare specialist, and am qualified to say this. My official title: MOS33Q10, Electronic Warfare Intercept Strategic Signal Processing/Storage Systems Specialist, a highly skilled MOS which requires advanced knowledge of many communications methods and circuits to the most minute level. I am officially qualified to place severe doubt that ordinary cell phone calls were ever made from the aircraft.

It was impossible for that to have happened, especially in a rural area for a number of reasons.

When you make a cell phone call, the first thing that happens is that your cell phone needs to contact a transponder. Your cell phone has a max transmit power of five watts, three watts is actually the norm. If an aircraft is going five hundred miles an hour, your cell phone will not be able to 1. Contact a tower, 2. Tell the tower who you are, and who your provider is, 3. Tell the tower what mode it wants to communicate with, and 4. Establish that it is in a roaming area before it passes out of a five watt range. This procedure, called an electronic handshake, takes approximately 45 seconds for a cell phone to complete upon initial power up in a roaming area because neither the cell phone or cell transponder knows where that phone is and what mode it uses when it is turned on. At 500 miles an hour, the aircraft will travel three times the range of a cell phone's five watt transmitter before this handshaking can occur. Though it is sometimes possible to connect during takeoff and landing, under the situation that was claimed the calls were impossible. The calls from the airplane were faked, no if's or buts.

I hope I made sense, if you have questions I will respond if possible. If I do not respond, please research this out yourself, search the boeing site, search the DARPA site, search were you have not searched before. Some of the information is classified and leaked by individuals, and it is also being scoured from the net. I have all of the original documents on my computer to safeguard against this.

Please do not ignore this, because only Norad has the flight codes for those aircraft, we did 911 to ourselves. Hitler had the Reichstag, we have 911. If 911 proves to not be enough to make the US citizenry set aside its rights for safety, the people who did 911 most certainly have access to nuclear material. 911 must be exposed for what it was before that material is used. "

John Gold - I like your idea of a statement of principles, and I am sure you understand the difficulties that go with this. Do you include claims that there was no plane at the Pentagon? Do you insist that Flight 93 was shot down? How do you assess the pre 9/11 intelligence issues? - as mistakes or a deception?

So this is the problem. Getting to people to agree. Certainly you can't get people to agree on answers or explanations about 9/11. But you may be able to get greater agreement among conspiracy theorists by listing features of 9/11 that you want the public to think about, and leaving out the conspiracy explanations. Example:

(1) Why public accountability is essential in a democracy.
(2) The failures in the 9/11 Commission :

* It was forbidden to investigate 9/11 - only to investigate how to forestall a repeat of it.
* It was forbidden to examine anything about the war games that paralyzed military responses.
* It was forbidden to examine the plane 'black boxes' - their existence was concealed from them.
* It was forbidden to examine any intelligence agency reports to the Bush Administration made prior to 9/11.
* It was forbidden to examine any aspect of the financing of the 9/11 terrorists.
* It was forbidden to examine 9/11 terrorists support networks within the US (a la Huffman Aviation)
* The 9/11 Commissioners were specifically chosen because of conflicts of interest that would limit their investigative zeal.

(3) 9/11 evidence was handled improperly

* Evidence concealed: flight recorders
* Evidence embargoed: various videos of the Pentagon attack kept from the 9/11 Commission and the public
* Evidence discarded: the hurried removal of the steel at the WTC.
* Evidence unreported: the testimony of Sibel Edmonds on terrorist financing.
* Evidence downplayed: fire chiefs who did not believe the fires were sufficient to bring down the towers.
* Witnesses intimidated: ordered by FBI and Intelligence officials not to discuss their experiences publicly.
* Standard FAA and military investigations that should have taken place following 9/11 but did not.
* Public discussion stifled by the Bush administration on alleged security grounds.
* Uncritical and compliant media reporting: on the identity of the hijackers and the official 9/11 explanation.

(4) Strong evidence contradictions remain unexamined from 9/11

* The Osama bin Laden fake confession video (have the comparative photos and a link to the original CNN website)
* Mahommed Atta, Islamic suicide warrior, had a stripper girlfriend, used cocaine and liked pork chops (Hopsicker)
* He stayed at a drug-trafficking flight centre whose activities were never examined by the 9/11 Commission.
* The evidence is more in favor of controlled demolitions at the WTC than collapses (Prof. Steven Jones)
* The penetration of six walls [3 rings] at the Pentagon was consistent with a missile, not the nosecone of a Boeing.
* Fighters that normally intercepted wayward aircraft after June 2001 needed Secretary Rumsfeld's approval.
* The debris of Flight 93 was spread over six miles supporting claims its was shot down.
* Senator Bob Graham, on The Lehrer Hour, admitted another nation was involved (Pakistan)
* Why did Gen. Ahmad, Head of Pakistani Military Intelligence, pay $100,000 into Mohammed Atta's account?

(5) Patterns of deception in public policy by the Bush administration

* Deception: the Osama bin Laden fake confession video
* Deception: the terrorist passport that survived the WTC fires
* Deception in history: Operation Northwoods
* Deception (recent): to Congress and the UN about WMDs in Iraq.
* Deception (recent): the fake Zarqawi letters published by the Pentagon.
* Deception: disputed findings in the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections.

(6) What we want independant reviews of each of the following:

* The failure of NORAD on 9/11 to intercept any of the hijacked planes.
* The specific nature of the war games on 9/11 and their effects on 9/11 responses.
* The collapse of the WTC buildings, esp. WTC7
* A review of the FEMA and NIST Reports.
* Analysis of the criticisms raised by Professor Steve Jones about the building collapses.
* The release of all video materials of the Pentagon crash.
* The crash of Flight 93.
* Independant scientific analysis of the alleged cell phone calls made on 9/11.
* Detailed evidence of the procedures for handling 9/11 victim remains and DNA.
* The failure of the Security Service to remove Pres. Bush from Sarasota.
* The detailed wherabouts and activities of Sec. Rumsfeld and Gen. Myers on 9/11.
* The report by Sec. Minetta on Flight 77 and VP Cheney.
* The provision of visas to 16 of the 19 terrorists at Jedda.
* The drug trafficking activities of Huffman Aviation and US regulatory oversight.
* The presence and activities of the terrorists while at Huffman Aviation.
* Makram Chams, his connection to Titan Corp and terrorist financing.
* Alleged payments by Gen. Mahmoud Ahmad and terrorist financing.
* Admissions by Sen. Bob Graham that a foreign nation assisted the terrorists.
* Evidence of FBI translator Sibel Edmonds in relation to pre-911 intelligence.
* Evidence of FBI informant Randy Glass in relation to pre-911 intelligence.
* A review of the irregular financial puts and calls trades occurring on 9/11.
* A review of all intelligence warnings prior to 9/11.

I discussed some of this here.

Clearly, there are other topics that could be included under these headings.

The other thing I would like to see is some sort of 9-11 quiz. Call it "Take the Test - So you know 9-11". People love competing against themselves. Asking them multiple choice quiz questions where they get to find out what they know (and surprise them with a few facts they don't know!)

I am going to work on this last bit.... I'll set it up and get back to you. Hope all this helps.