911 Dutch Treat?


By Stephen M. St. John

Why haven't we seen the routine video surveillance tapes of ANY of the passengers alleged to have boarded the ill-fated 9/11 flights at Boston's Logan, Newark's Liberty and Washington's Dulles international airports?

Will two lips in Holland end the 9/11 coverup?

NEW YORK -- Those who have bothered to read the 9/11 skeptics know about the extraordinary "coincidences" that took place that fateful morning. One of them happens to be the lack of routine video surveillance tapes of ANY of the passengers alleged to have boarded the ill-fated flights at Boston's Logan, Newark's Liberty and Washington's Dulles international airports.

The 9/11 Commission simply ignored this issue even though it can be fairly said that not only did the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington originate at these airport gates, but so did the resulting invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Why haven't we seen these video tapes? Why has the Fourth Estate failed to ask, Why haven't we seen these video tapes? Why the conspiracy of silence?

Well, the answer may very well lie in Holland. You see, security at some if not all of these airport gates of 9/11 was in the hands of an American minimum-wage subsidiary of a Dutch corporation called ICTS-International. What is most remarkable about this arrangement is that the Dutch corporation ICTS-International was, as of 9/11, Dutch in name only. An early 2003 check of its web-site showed a Board of Directors consisting entirely of nationals of the Zionist state with the single exception of the Comptroller, who apparently was the nominal Dutchman. And if I need to clue in the clueless, the Zionists were hellbent on finding a reason for the USA to invade Iraq. And it would be fair to say that these Zionists of ICTS-International were the gatekeepers of 9/11 and all that followed, such as the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan. Interesting, eh?

But the story gets even wilder. Not long after 9/11, the chairman of ICTS, Ezra Harel, whose surname is famous in the annals of the Mossad, died suddenly of a heart attack in his early 50s on his yacht off the coast of Palestine. Talk about not being available for comment!

But that's not the kicker. Hours before the House version of the first Patriot Act went to a vote, "technical corrections" were inserted into the body of the legislation whereby foreign security companies such as ICTS-International would be immune from lawsuits related to the events of 9/11. Talk about not being available for deposition! This "Patriot" act legislative sleight of hand occurred before the inception of the 9/11 Commission when Fearless Leader George W. Bush was still resisting the very IDEA of an investigation into 9/11. Hence, in the face of an institutional cover-up, citizens were denied the possibility of a discovery process which is normally afforded to litigants. Without such discovery process, ICTS-International would never be compelled by a court of law to give testimony and show evidence related to the missing airport video surveillance tapes of 9/11 or any other aspect of security measures in place on 9/11.

The legal situation has since changed and ICTS-International is now a co-defendant in a lawsuit in Federal District Court for the Southern District of New York. (see www.sept11tortlitigation.com) More about this will follow.

And so, we are supposed to believe that even as multiple NORAD drills were underway, video surveillance tapes from multiple cameras at multiple locations in three different "Category X" high security international airports just happened to fail to capture images of ANY of the passengers - the good, the bad and the ugly - about to board the ill-fated flights of 9/11! As many 9/11 skeptics already know, what I have just described here is just one aspect of the BIG LIE about 9/11. Some of the answers to our national security problem will be found in Holland. That is for sure!

But there are those who will insist that they have seen on television video surveillance tapes of the hijackers of 9/11 and are satisfied with the official explanation of what happened on that fateful day.

However, these people are confused by the tape repeatedly shown on TV of two of the alleged hijackers (Mohammad Atta being one of them) passing through a security checkpoint at Portland Maine International Airport to take a connecting flight to Boston on the morning of 11 September 2001.

This Portland tape has no timestamp, which makes it suspect. Also, even IF the tape were genuine, it does not place either of the two young Arabs at Logan International Airport.

Nearly all Americans were lulled into believing that the Portland, Maine tape was sufficient proof when it was not. People were mesmerized by the repeated showing of this tape on TV and in their emotional state did not realize exactly what they were looking at and what they weren't looking at.

Also, yet another tape was shown in the 24 hour interval leading to the official release of the 9/11 Commission Report; however, this tape, released to the news media by the South Carolina law firm Motley Rice LLC, was almost immediately withdrawn because it quickly became apparent that it was bogus. This Motley Rice surveillance tape purportedly showed two young Arabs boarding flight 77 at Dulles International Airport on the morning of 9/11. But again, just like the Portland Maine tape, there is no timestamp, which makes it suspect. Beyond that, as pointed out by the late, great Internet researcher/writer Joe Vialls, who some believe is really Ari Ben-Menashe (see www.judicial-inc.biz), the shadows appearing just outside the terminal door are those you would expect to see at midday rather than in the early morning. Moreover, the surveillance camera is no ordinary surveillance camera; for the tape reveals a panning camera focused on the two young Arabs and then zooming in on them and then moving left as they move left instead of following the pretty blonde lady who was going to the right. Clearly, some person unknown at some time unknown was filming these young Arab men for a specific but unknown reason.

This Motley Rice film was never shown again because of the critical eyes of researchers, many of whom preserved copies of the mysterious tape in their computers.

In consideration of the foregoing, one must conclude that no tape has EVER been shown that reveals ANY of the passengers boarding the 9/11 flights out of Boston's Logan, Newark's Liberty and Washington's Dulles international airports.

One must also ask, if the 9/11 surveillance tapes at these airports do in fact exist, why haven't we seen them? And if they do not even exist, how can this be explained?

the question of course is not MIHOP or LIHOP? It is WHO MIHOP?

And suspect #1 would seem to be a joint Israeli/American covert op involving Silverstein, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Neocons in the Pentagon and agents of any number of Israeli legit/semi-legit organizations.

This core leadership had more than likely for many months been recruiting people along the lines of what Sibel Edmonds exposed, with promises of great profit to those who would climb on board the conspiracy. I would put the Pakistani general who wired money to "Mohammed Atta" in that last category, probably along with Musharraf himself.

Not everyone involved had to know exactly what they were in on, just to do their part, collect their loot, and keep quiet. Kind of like Enron.

Open a real investigation, subpoena people right and left, start the indictments, and the truth will be known quicker than you can say "crimes against humanity".

Let's get on with it, shall we?

oh yeah, let's not forget the Bush crime family

They most likely played the role of facilitators, i.e. looking the other way and, having ultimate responsibility (through W) playing dumb when it counts. First by attacking Afghanistan, then by attempting to limit the investigation, then by compromising the investigation with their lap dog Zelikow, then by being "deceived" by the neo-conning Pentagon into pressing for war in Iraq, finally by taking the fall for the "bungled" campaign there (actually a neocon success, breaking Iraq into three smaller more pliable states) in order to make it look like it was they all along at the helm. LIHOP is the final piece of this fiction, leaving a question as to whether the soon-to-be "discredited" Bush actually knew in advance of "al Qaeda"'s plot, which of course will never be proven one way or the other.

Awesome, somebody must have

Awesome, somebody must have these

Loads of gems in that article!

We need more excellent blogs like this!

(BTW, I had almost forgotten that the dubious video of Atta & pal was made in Portland, ME & not Boston, MA. The duo needing to connect in Boston made the perfect pretext for Atta's incriminating luggage to be left behind & discovered. )

According to the 9/11 Commission...

Boarding the Flights
Boston: American 11 and United 175. Atta and Omari boarded a 6:00 A.M. flight from Portland to Boston's Logan International Airport.1

When he checked in for his flight to Boston, Atta was selected by a computerized prescreening system known as CAPPS (Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System), created to identify passengers who should be subject to special security measures. Under security rules in place at the time, the only consequence of Atta's selection by CAPPS was that his checked bags were held off the plane until it was confirmed that he had boarded the aircraft. This did not hinder Atta's plans. 2

Atta and Omari arrived in Boston at 6:45. Seven minutes later, Atta apparently took a call from Marwan al Shehhi, a longtime colleague who was at another terminal at Logan Airport. They spoke for three minutes.3 It would be their final conversation.

Between 6:45 and 7:40, Atta and Omari, along with Satam al Suqami, Wail al Shehri, and Waleed al Shehri, checked in and boarded American Airlines Flight 11, bound for Los Angeles. The flight was scheduled to depart at 7:45.4

In another Logan terminal, Shehhi, joined by Fayez Banihammad, Mohand al Shehri, Ahmed al Ghamdi, and Hamza al Ghamdi, checked in for United Airlines Flight 175, also bound for Los Angeles. A couple of Shehhi's colleagues were obviously unused to travel; according to the United ticket agent, they had trouble understanding the standard security questions, and she had to go over them slowly until they gave the routine, reassuring answers.5 Their flight was scheduled to depart at 8:00.

The security checkpoints through which passengers, including Atta and his colleagues, gained access to the American 11 gate were operated by Globe Security under a contract with American Airlines. In a different terminal, the single checkpoint through which passengers for United 175 passed was controlled by United Airlines, which had contracted with Huntleigh USA to perform the screening.6

In passing through these checkpoints, each of the hijackers would have been screened by a walk-through metal detector calibrated to detect items with at least the metal content of a .22-caliber handgun. Anyone who might have set off that detector would have been screened with a hand wand-a procedure requiring the screener to identify the metal item or items that caused the alarm. In addition, an X-ray machine would have screened the hijackers' carry-on belongings. The screening was in place to identify and confiscate weapons and other items prohibited from being carried onto a commercial flight.7 None of the checkpoint supervisors recalled the hijackers or reported anything suspicious regarding their screening.8

While Atta had been selected by CAPPS in Portland, three members of his hijacking team-Suqami, Wail al Shehri, and Waleed al Shehri-were selected in Boston. Their selection affected only the handling of their checked bags, not their screening at the checkpoint. All five men cleared the checkpoint and made their way to the gate for American 11. Atta, Omari, and Suqami took their seats in business class (seats 8D, 8G, and 10B, respectively). The Shehri brothers had adjacent seats in row 2 (Wail in 2A,Waleed in 2B), in the first-class cabin. They boarded American 11 between 7:31 and 7:40. The aircraft pushed back from the gate at 7:40. 9

Shehhi and his team, none of whom had been selected by CAPPS, boarded United 175 between 7:23 and 7:28 (Banihammad in 2A, Shehri in 2B, Shehhi in 6C, Hamza al Ghamdi in 9C, and Ahmed al Ghamdi in 9D).Their aircraft pushed back from the gate just before 8:00.10



Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


here are the footnotes:

1. No physical, documentary, or analytical evidence provides a convincing explanation of why Atta and Omari drove to Portland, Maine, from Boston on the morning of September 10, only to return to Logan on Flight 5930 on the morning of September 11. However, Atta reacted negatively when informed in Portland that he would have to check in again in Boston. Michael Touhey interview (May 27, 2004).Whatever their reason, the Portland Jetport was the nearest airport to Boston with a 9/11 flight that would have arrived at Logan in time for the passengers to transfer to American Airlines Flight 11, which had a scheduled departure time of 7:45 A.M. See Tom Kinton interview (Nov. 6, 2003); Portland International Jetport site visit (Aug. 18, 2003).

Like the other two airports used by the 9/11 hijackers (Newark Liberty International Airport and Washington Dulles International Airport), Boston's Logan International Airport was a "Category X" airport: i.e., among the largest facilities liable to highest threat, and generally subject to greater security requirements. See FAA report, "Civil Aviation Security Reference Handbook," May 1999, pp. 117-118.Though Logan was selected for two of the hijackings (as were both American and United Airlines), we found no evidence that the terrorists targeted particular airports or airlines. Nothing stands out about any of them with respect to the only security layer that was relevant to the actual hijackings: checkpoint screening. See FAA briefing materials, "Assessment and Testing Data for BOS, EWR, and IAD," Oct. 24, 2001. Despite security problems at Logan (see, e.g., two local Fox 25 television investigative reports in February and April 2001, and an email in August 2001 from a former FAA special agent to the agency's leadership regarding his concerns about lax security at the airport), no evidence suggests that such issues entered into the terrorists' targeting: they simply booked heavily fueled east-to-west transcontinental flights of the large Boeing aircraft they trained to fly that were scheduled to take off at nearly the same time. See Matt Carroll, "Fighting Terror Sense of Alarm; Airlines Foiled Police Logan Probe," Boston Globe, Oct. 17, 2001, p. B1.

2. CAPPS was an FAA-approved automated system run by the airlines that scored each passenger's profile to identify those who might pose a threat to civil aviation. The system also chose passengers at random to receive additional security scrutiny. Ten out of the 19 hijackers (including 9 out of 10 on the two American Airlines flights) were identified via the CAPPS system. According to the procedures in place on 9/11, in addition to those flagged by the CAPPS algorithm, American's ticket agents were to mark as "selectees" those passengers who did not provide correct responses to the required security questions, failed to show proper identification, or met other criteria. See FAA report, "Air Carrier Standard Security Program," May 2001, pp. 75-76; FAA record of interview, Donna Thompson, Sept. 23, 2001; Chuck Severance interview (Apr. 15, 2004); Jim Dillon interview (Apr. 15, 2004); Diane Graney interview (Apr. 16, 2004). It appears that Atta was selected at random. See Al Hickson briefing (June 8, 2004).

3.The call was placed from a pay phone in Terminal C (between the screening checkpoint and United 175's boarding gate). We presume Shehhi made the call, but we cannot be sure. Logan International Airport site visit (Aug. 15, 2003); see also FBI response to Commission briefing request no. 6, undated (topic 11).

4. Flight 11 pushed back from Gate 32 in Terminal B at 7:40. See AAL response to the Commission's February 3, 2004, requests, Mar. 15, 2004.

5. See UAL letter, "Flight 175-11Sep01 Passenger ACI Check-in History," July 11, 2002. Customer service representative Gail Jawahir recalled that her encounter with the Ghamdis occurred at "shortly before 7 A.M.," and when shown photos of the hijackers, she indicated that Mohand al Shehri resembled one of the two she checked in (suggesting they were Banihammad and Shehri). However, she also recalled that the men had the same last name and had assigned seats on row 9 (i.e., the Ghamdis), and that account has been adopted here. In either case, she almost certainly was dealing with one set of the Flight 175 hijackers. See FBI reports of investigation, interviews of Gail Jawahir, Sept. 21, 2001; Sept. 28, 2001. Even had the hijackers been unable to understand and answer the two standard security questions, the only consequence would have been the screening of their carry-on and checked bags for explosives. See FAA report, "Air Carrier Standard Security Program," May 2001, p. 76.

6. For Flight 11, two checkpoints provided access to the gate. The second was opened at 7:15 A.M. The FAA conducted many screener evaluations between September 11, 1999, and September 11, 2001.At the primary checkpoints, in aggregate, screeners met or exceeded the average for overall, physical search, and X-ray detection, while falling below the norm for metal detection. No FAA Special Assessments (by "red teams") were done at Logan security checkpoints during the two years prior to September 11, 2001. See FAA briefing materials, "Assessment and Testing Data for BOS, EWR, and IAD," Oct. 24, 2001.


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


25 Chinese arrested for Ridiculing a Government Official in a

text message! How long before that happens here in U.S.A.? http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2006/061106Arrested.htm

New Law: NO FLY FOR ALL AMERICANS! This is going to happen in U.S.A.!
Now: US Citizens to be Required ''Clearance'' to Leave USA International

If Uncle Sam gets its way, beginning on Jan. 14, 2007, we'll all be on no-fly lists, unless the government gives us permission to leave-or re-enter-the United States. http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/no_fly_list_new_law_no_fly_for_all_a...

I asked this question 5

I asked this question 5 years ago. I'll tell you why there are no cctv images of any the passengers, the alleged flights didn't take off and the passenger lists are faked. Just like the footage.


Drones were used to hit targets that day

Read Operation Northwoods!

no, no. the footage is real, as were the drones. but

the flights and passenger lists were more than likely fake.


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


give up the holoplane shit seriously

I can see faked rosters, but the gradiose and overly complex effort required to do holo planes. Yeah, get a clue.