New Documents Claim Intelligence on Bin Laden, al-Qaeda Targets Withheld From Congress' 9/11 Probe

SLICK PROPAGANDA from Jason Leopold at Truncated TRUTHOUT

EXCLUSIVE: New Documents Claim Intelligence on Bin Laden, al-Qaeda Targets Withheld From Congress' 9/11 Probe
Monday 13 June 2011
by: Jeffrey Kaye and Jason Leopold, Truthout | Report

On the tenth anniversary of 9/11, just as he has done in years past, a top military intelligence analyst identified by the US government only as "Iron Man" will hunker down in front of his television and watch a particularly gruesome scene of the carnage left behind on that fateful day.

"Although I try to avoid it, I glimpse a film clip, a scene, of people throwing themselves from a burning tower, people who deserved better protection from their country, from me and the men I worked with, and I hear the sounds of the lobby in the [World Trade Center] on tape," said the man, whose alter ego chosen by the government appears to be paying homage to the flawed Marvel Comics superhero. "To me, the sights and sounds, the smoke of that day are not yet history. They are a knot, a silence, a facial tick, a missing friend in Iraq. They are not history yet."

For many Americans, the emotional reaction to President Barack Obama's announcement last month that a Navy Seal team had killed Osama bin Laden during a raid at his compound in Pakistan was celebratory. But for others, like the mysterious Iron Man, who has spent his career lurking in the shadows, the death of the late al-Qaeda leader is a painful reminder of what could have been avoided had the government heeded numerous early warnings of an impending attack against the very targets terrorists struck on 9/11.

The intelligence failures leading up to the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon are an issue the media - and lawmakers - put to bed years ago, despite the fact that new information continues to trickle out, undercutting the integrity of the official investigations into who knew what and when.

It was an exclusive story Truthout published May 23 in the wake of Bin Laden's death, focusing on a little-known intelligence unit that was ordered to stop tracking his movements prior to 9/11, and led Iron Man to contact Truthout to share previously undisclosed documents he recently obtained under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), which appear to cast further doubt on the official narrative and suggests high-level military and intelligence officials withheld key evidence from Congressional lawmakers probing the attacks.

The materials Iron Man provided to Truthout stand as the most revealing information to surface in years regarding Bin Laden and al-Qaeda's plans to attack the United States.

This is the first page of "Iron Man's" complaint to the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General related to intelligence work he did on Osama Bin Laden and al Qaeda.

This is the first page of "Iron Man's" complaint to the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General related to intelligence work he did on Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda.

Formal Complaint

Five years ago, Iron Man, who requested Truthout conceal his true identity out of concern for his family's privacy, lodged a formal complaint with the Department of Defense's Office of Inspector General after he was accused of improperly handling classified material.

Iron Man filed a FOIA request in September 2006, seeking a declassified copy of the six-page complaint he filed with the inspector general's office. He finally received a copy on April 8, just a few weeks prior to the raid on Bin Laden's compound.

What he revealed in that letter, portions of which were redacted by the government because the information is classified, is the inner workings of an elite intelligence unit he headed at one point: the Asymmetric Threats Division, formed in 1999, and "charged with reporting on asymmetric threats, especially terrorism."

The unit worked with Joint Task Force-Civil Support (JTF-CS), also set up in 1999. According to the Defense Department (DoD), JTF-CS was charged with supporting "terrorist response operations in the continental US" and providing "military assistance to civil authorities."

The Asymmetric Threats Division is referred to as DO5, a branch of the Joint Forces Intelligence Command (JFIC), whose responsibilities included, among other things, vetting human intelligence sources on behalf of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). From 1998 to 2001, Iron Man was working as a counterterrorism/counterintelligence analyst for the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS), assigned to JFIC.

The JFIC is an elite intelligence unit that falls under the authority of the United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) and "had a direct and assigned purview on international terrorism against the US, to include the operations of al-Qa'ida and the 9/11 attackers."

The JFIC was also responsible for monitoring Bin Laden and other suspected terrorists who resided in Afghanistan between 1998 and 2000 and was charged with constructing likely scenarios that could be carried out by terrorists and possible government responses.

Iron Man noted that the "motivation for this complaint is multi-faceted." He said the "purpose" of the letter he wrote "is to formally complain" to the inspector general that "JFIC, when instructed in or before May 2002 to provide all original material it might have relevant to al-Qa'ida and the 9/11 attacks for a Congressional inquiry, intentionally misinformed the Department of Defense that it had no purview on such matters and no such material."

"JFIC's role" and the DoD's "role, in the pursuit of al-Qa'ida before 9/11 and timely analysis of the targets actually struck by the 9/11 attackers have remained unknown even to senior DoD officials," the letter says.

Moreover, there has never been a public accounting of the work conducted by DO5. But Iron Man's letter provides deep insight into the secret military intelligence group's highly classified activities.

Tracking Terrorists

DO5 was "a fore-runner of current all-source fusion centers," the letter Iron Man wrote says. Individuals assigned to the unit had "a wide mix of skills" in intelligence disciplines, including human and open-source intelligence, signals intelligence and imagery and signature intelligence.

DO5 drafted "numerous original reports ... identifying probable and possible movements and locations of Usama bin Ladin and Mullah Omar," including likely identification of the house where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed allegedly planned the 9/11 attacks.

From 1999 to 2001, the intelligence unit also "conducted imagery analysis of Jalalabad and Qandahar" and other parts of Afghanistan as they were "pulled into a community-wide initiative on al-Qa'ida."

The letter further states, "DO5 was able to 'scoop' [the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency]," an agency which played a crucial role in identifying the compound in Pakistan where Bin Laden had been hiding.

According to US government officials, it was one of Bin Laden's most trusted couriers, whom intelligence operatives identified about five years ago, that led the CIA to pinpoint Bin Laden's Abbottabad compound.

But Iron Man's 2006 letter states that DO5 worked closely with DIA and was instrumental in identifying "a likely financial courier" for al-Qaeda, and one who may have led intelligence officials directly to Bin Laden well before 9/11.

Early Intelligence Pointed to the World Trade Center, Pentagon

In 2002, following his departure to DIA, Iron Man returned to JFIC to teach two classes on asymmetric warfare, and he kept "numerous" slides related to DO5's work on "pre-9/11 briefings."

As Iron Man explained in his letter of complaint to DoD's inspector general, "upon my arrival at DIA, I had these documents e-mailed from JFIC to my DIA account, so that I could use them as references for the asymmetric warfare course I was drafting for DIA, and as references for any future counter-terrorism work I might pursue at DIA."

It appears that the allegation Iron Man mishandled classified material stems from a decision he made to email the briefing slides to his DIA account. Iron Man declined to elaborate about the circumstances of the allegations leveled against him. Still, what he reveals in his carefully worded letter in response to those charges is explosive.

"I kept the original classifications on the slides, as historical documents, although the fact that al-Qa'ida was likely to attack the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was clearly no longer classified." (Emphasis added.)

Iron Man further elaborated on this point by stating that high-level DoD officials held discussions about DO5's intelligence activities between the summer of 2000 and June 2001 revolving around al-Qaeda's interest in striking the Pentagon, the World Trade Center (WTC), and other targets.

In other words, the Bush administration was fully aware the terrorist organization had set its sights on those structures prior to 9/11 and, apparently, government officials failed to act on those warnings.

For example, Iron Man states in his letter that in the summer of 2000, DO5 briefed USJFCOM senior intelligence officials and staffers, including the deputy commander in chief, on the "WMD Threat to the U.S."

Iron Man describes a "sensitive," "oral briefing" that took place that summer "indicating that the World Trade Centers #1 and #2 were the most likely buildings to be attacked [by al-Qaeda], followed closely by the Pentagon. The briefer indicated that the worst case scenario would be one tower collapsed onto another."

Furthermore, as he states in his letter, Iron Man was certain that such a scenario was part of a "red cell analysis" discussion that took place prior to the intelligence briefing and included a finding that the buildings "could be struck by a jetliner." He wrote that there was a suggestion about alerting WTC security and engineering or architectural staff, "but the idea was not further explored because of a command climate discouraging contact with the civilian community."

One official who attended the DO5 briefing was Vice Adm. Martin J. Meyer, the deputy commander in chief (DCINC), USJFCOM (Iron Man's complaint does not identify Meyer by name, but notes the presence of the "DCINC" for USJFCOM). But despite the red flags raised during the briefing, Meyer reportedly told Maj. Gen. Larry Arnold, the commander of the Continental United States NORAD Region (CONR), and other high-level CONR staffers two weeks before the 9/11 attacks that "their concern about Osama bin Laden as a possible threat to America was unfounded and that, to repeat, 'If everyone would just turn off CNN, there wouldn't be a threat from Osama bin Laden.'"

Mayer retired from the Navy in 2003 and was hired by defense contractor Lockheed Martin.

Intelligence Withheld From Congress

Even worse, according to Iron Man's letter, the information DO5 had collected about Bin Laden, al-Qaeda and the lead up to 9/11 was withheld from Congress after the House and Senate Intelligence Committees launched an investigation into the attacks.

"When the Justice Department requested all documents relating to 9/11 from DoD in May 2002, I notified [redacted] in the DIA Congressional Affairs office that I retained these documents," Iron Man's letter states. "I spoke to [redacted] JFIC DI1 [an individual who works in the command administrative staff], who informed me that JFIC had already submitted a response without any documents. I was surprised and disappointed when my successor at DO5 [redacted] notified me of the full JFIC non-response. I notified [redacted] in the Congressional Affairs office, and was told to submit the documents as DIA documents, with an explanatory e-mail. I did so on 29 May 2002, presuming (probably correctly) that the documents might be overlooked, since they originated at JFIC. I forwarded copies to [redacted] (who was departing JFIC that week), (his subordinate), and [redacted] (who was also departing JFIC that week)."

A DoD spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment. Spokespeople for the House and Senate Intelligence Committees also did not respond to calls for comment.

After raising his concerns, Iron Man, who from late 2000 to June 2001 was acting head of DO5, was told by his former boss that JFIC's formal response to Congress' inquiries was that "al-Qaida and the 9/11 attacks had been outside JFIC's purview and that JFIC consequently held no material on those issues," which was a lie.

Iron Man's boss said, "He insisted [to officials who responded to the Congressional inquiries] that such was not the case, but was told this was JFIC's response."

Iron Man wrote that "many people" working at government agencies were knowledgeable about JFIC's "role in preparing original analysis" on al-Qaeda, including officials at the CIA, NCIS, USJFCOM, DIA and NSA, whose names were redacted in the letter he sent to DoD's inspector general.

However, after conducting at least 300 interviews and reviewing hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, the final report issued by the House and Senate Intelligence Committees in December 2002, into "Intelligence Community Activities Before And After The Terrorist Attacks Of September 11, 2001" did not cite any of DO5's work on al-Qaeda or Bin Laden or the fact that the intelligence unit was able to identify the terrorist group's top two targets in the US. The later 2004 9/11 Commission Report did not mention DO5 or JFIC.

Flawed DoD Investigation

Although the inspector general acted on Iron Man's complaint and launched an investigation, the findings of the probe, outlined in a report, declassified last year, previously reported by Truthout, was highly flawed and failed to address Iron Man's charges that intelligence was withheld from Congress.

Indeed, it appears the author of the inspector general's report confused Congress' investigation into the 9/11 attacks with the independent National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, otherwise known as the 9/11 Commission, created in late 2002 by legislation passed by Congress. The inspector general's report insisted it did not find any "evidence that the Joint Forces Intelligence Command misled Congress by withholding operational information in response to the 9/11 Commission."

But Iron Man's complaint specifically addressed intelligence withheld from Congress' inquiries into the 9/11 attacks, not the independent panel's probe, thereby dismissing an allegation Iron Man had never made.

Iron Man told Truthout the inspector general's final report "was, shall we say, very incorrect, and intentionally did not address the full scope of the [his] complaint. "

The watchdog did not tackle another of Iron Man's explosive claims about DO5 briefings that centered on "numerous examples and suggestions of how [Osama bin Laden] was being hunted by JFIC and could be hunted by the [intelligence community]."

One such briefing held for a "DIA senior intelligence officer on counterterrorism" was entitled "The Search (for Osama bin Laden) - A [commander in chief] Level View," which included "a compendium of imagery of [a] suspected [Bin Laden] house dating from 23 August 1999 until 11 April 2000."

At the briefing, intelligence officials were informed that "eleven special reports" by DO5 had been disseminated in the "Daily Intelligence Summary on [Bin Laden], Taliban leadership, Afghan military movements, UN locations, and the economic status of Afghanistan."

Another briefing for the counterintelligence/counterterrorism chief at NCIS, and about 30 NCIS agents, "clearly stated the JFIC's Asymmetric Threat Division monitored 'worldwide [counterterrorism/counterintelligence] traffic' and routinely prepared 'analytic reports' and 'supplements national agencies with original intelligence on [Bin Laden] and Afghanistan.'"

Congress was kept in the dark about those discussions and was not shown the documents distributed to intelligence officials at the briefings. The inspector general never bothered to find out why. Remarkably, the watchdog stated in its report, "JFIC did not have the mission to track Usama Bin Ladin or predict imminent US targets."

Iron Man told Truthout it was key intelligence withheld from Congress about al-Qaeda and Bin Laden's pre-9/11 activities that also played a part in his decision to file a complaint with the inspector general.

"My concern was not only that the 9/11 commission had not been informed, but the larger Congress, in its larger oversight responsibilities, had also not been informed," he said.

A Heavy Burden

What remains unclear is exactly what took place back in May 2006 that prompted Iron Man's complaint to the inspector general, given that the issues he had raised centered on events that unfolded four years earlier.

The answer to that question can be found in these passages of Iron Man's letter, particularly the last few sentences:

"I do believe that knowledge of the work done by DO5 would add to DoD's understanding of its role in the events leading up to 9/11, and how to avoid future attacks," Iron Man wrote. "I have been falsely accused of revealing classified information on DO5's work, when I am certain that information is not and has not been classified since 9/11, and I do want to see myself cleared of that false accusation.

"In addition, I and the deputy of that team, [redacted], especially carried the burden of knowledge of how close DoD came to bin Ladin and perhaps being able to reduce the number of lives lost on 9/11 ..."

The deputy whose name the government redacted from Iron Man's letter, is believed to be Kirk von Ackermann, a former Air Force captain and intelligence analyst, who was working for the US Army as a contractor in Iraq and disappeared in October 2003 while traveling between Tikrit and Kirkuk. A computer, a briefcase containing $40,000, and other materials were found in von Ackerman's vehicle after he went missing.

Because von Ackerman's name was classified in the complaint Iron Man filed with the inspector general, he could not confirm whether von Ackerman is the individual he was referring to.

Just three months after Iron Man filed his complaint with DoD's inspector general, in August 2006, the Army Criminal Investigative Service concluded that von Ackerman had been kidnapped and killed. His remains have never been found nor has anyone claimed responsibility for his death.

Von Ackerman's tragic story has been previously reported by journalist-blogger Susie Dow on the web site e Pluribus Media, but has largely remained under the radar. In a May 6 article she published on her personal blog, Dow identified von Ackermann as a member of JFIC's Asymmetric Threats Division. Iron Man's complaint suggests he ultimately became deputy chief of DO5.

In October 2006, Dow wrote that von Ackermann was "assigned to a counterterrorism team."

"You'll find no mention of either Kirk von Ackermann or his team in the 9-11 Commission report.... Well before 9-11, Kirk von Ackermann predicted aircraft could be hijacked and used as weapons against the United States. He also predicted potential targets."

Von Ackerman's wife, Megan von Ackerman, has maintained a blog called "Missing in Iraq," dedicated to her missing husband. In March 2006, she wrote that her husband had planned for such a catastrophic event, but his warnings were ignored:

"... When 9/11 happened everyone around us reacted as normal, civilians would - shock, horror, fear ... but Kirk, isolated from the intelligence and military community of people who knew what he knew, felt what he felt, was essentially alone," Megan von Ackerman wrote. "For a year he had spent his days imagining just this sort of scenario. He had come up with countless plans, evaluated targets, totaled up casualties and estimated political value. He had thought like a terrorist so he could stop them. Now he had to watch it made horribly real - the nightmare he had worked so hard to avoid ... Kirk had tried to make the warning, he had worked endless hours to stop this very thing happening. He knew he had no guilt that he had been ignored. But he retained an enormous sense of responsibility - not only for what happened, but for dealing with the new world that 9/11 ushered in."

Knowing exactly how close he, von Ackerman and DO5 came to capturing Bin Laden and possibly thwarting the attacks on 9/11 is a "burden" Iron Man said he "no longer wants to carry."

"[Redacted] and I discussed this issue the last time we spoke," Iron Man wrote in the final paragraph of his letter to the inspector general, likely referring to von Ackerman. "He remains the longest missing man in Iraq in this war, and I want, one day, to be able to explain to his children what their father foresaw."

comments at Truncated Truthout

comments at TRUTHOUT are 80% in favor or complete TRUTH

here is the author:

Thanks for all of these comments folks. I would just like to remind readers that this is a report focusing exclusively on the intelligence and intelligence failures, as well as revealing details of a highly classified, secret intelligence unit charged with tracking bin Laden and al-Qaeda prior to 9/11 and how its work was withheld from Congress. This is NOT a story about what happened on 9/11 and comments that get into discussions about the attacks are diverting attention away from the important revelations we presented."

comments at truthout are gone now

estimated 80-90% of the 225+ comments on this at truthout article were critical of their coverage of 911 issues.


The Truth is out

I think it was a glitch with the technic, I hope so.

I see six comments now

there were 226 or more

here is what has appeared since censoring

Truthout has deleted hundreds of comments on this article. Shame on them. Even on the Fox News website they don't delete comments like this!

Adam S. you are right about this. Two days ago I made a post concerning the mass deletion. Now my comment is gone. I'm not sure what's going on. Maybe truthout is somehow afraid of the truth.

I asked the website to re-post the comments. My post was followed only by one comment before it was gone. Something is fishy.

The cowardliness of truthout and the rest of the mainstream American media on this issue is an embarrassment. Why would they even bother to produce such a report and not want to really discover the absolute truth on this issue?

We need to solve this crime and bring justice to the people who are actually responsible. Future generations should not be subjected to the false history of the Bush Crime Family.

Yes, shame on truthout for such a craven act of censorship. It's clear that this site is just another example of ostensible diversity masking actual uniformity. Truthout is not interested in truth, it's interested in suppressing truth. The demolition of the World Trade Center on 9/11 will go down in history as one of the most infamous crimes ever committed, and truthout will be remembered as one of the fake champions of alternative media that were instrumental in the cover-up.

explain to me why this is "slick propaganda"

I'm actually really looking forward to your response.

so slick in fact...

that most will miss it.


that was kind of a let down.

I dont understand the hostility toward useful information.

Over the years TRUTHOUT has

Over the years TRUTHOUT has had endless opportunities to report on the thousands of lies, distortions, fabrications, that we know is the "official" story of 9/11, but they will not touch it. Instead, on occasion Truthout gives us a story that pretends to add to or question what we know of 911 but in reality is simply reinforcing the MYTH.

In this case the fabricated " back story" of UBL and al-qaeda's intent to strike, which was slipped into a compartmentalized intelligence apparatus for later use. Truthout gladly ran with it as bombshell knowing their role as deceivers.



I understand the typical truther mentality that any publication that isn't screaming "INSIDE JOB!" from its own rooftops only exists to disseminate propaganda.

But do you think its within the realm of possibility that the editors and writers at Truthout have over the years been inundated by massive amounts of emails verging on abuse that demanded they cover this theory or that theory, and when they didn't, were accused of running a propaganda website for the DoD or some other such nonsense? If its within the realm of possibility that writers want nothing to do with the truth movement due to such behavior, then I believe jumping to the conclusion of accusing a website of engaging in propaganda to cover up someone elses crimes is a little ...out there.

Question: Do you think Muslim terrorist organizations actually exist?

Do you think Muslim terrorist organizations actually exist?

I'm sure they exist, but are dwarfed by our own State Sponsored Terrorists. We are the largest arms dealers worldwide, we kill/maim more humans than anyone else presently. We spend more on "defense" than all of the world's countries combined. We are human, no more no less, we just have more resources to devote towards this uniquely human endeavor. We have become a nation of liars and don't seem to care as much as we may have in the past. Humans are what they are, but we shouldn't stop trying to live up to our ideals.

7man: "They exist"

Well, since Joe is absent, and you've taken it upon yourself to answer my question to him, do you care to tackle the other portion of my post?


7man does say, "I'm sure they exist."

But I'm not signing up for taking over for anyone else.

Do they Exist?

Clarification: I think Al-Qaeda is a US construct, and the War on Terror is a fraud- from day one. I support anyone to defend their own turf, especially if they have been there for many generations, if not centuries. Wars of aggression should be accountable to existing international laws. Diplomacy is always preferable to war.

Question: Do you think Muslim

Question: Do you think Muslim terrorist organizations actually exist?

Do I think there are Muslims that will fight in any way possible to combat those who would annihilate them or convert them?


Do I think they did 9/11?

Not likely

Were some stooges involved?


Perhaps a better question is...

"What is the magnitude of 'Muslim terrorist organizations'? and what is their potential?"

If I have my stats right, about 40,000 human deaths result per year from automobile accidents in the United States. This means that each month, on average, more people die from automobile crashes than perished on 9/11. And, come the tenth anniversary of 9/11, human deaths from automobiles since Sept 11, 2001, will exceed the total deaths that occurred on 9/11 by more than 120 times. Yet, do the media hammer into our heads anything about a war on automobiles?

The comparison is perhaps unfair in some ways, due to intent--and I in no way mean to make light of 9/11--but the point is, the "war on terror" seems to be terribly exaggerated in order to maintain public momentum toward it. That strikes me as painfully obvious. Add to this that if we assume hijackers commandeered the planes and crashed into the WTC, the total number of deaths would have been much less without the ensuing demolitions. Further, if it turns out the planes (with the hijackers in them) were "GPSed" into the buildings, well....

Of course, "Muslim terrorist organizations" could proliferate beyond their current numbers and powers. In any case, I believe they constitute a genuine concern. However, the level of concern, to repeat, seems exaggerated.

After reading my second paragraph, one might ask why I am interested in 9/11. It's because 1) it was deliberate murder on a large scale; 2) it's a general casus belli for war-mongering; 3) it is a key to get beyond the doors of endless lies we are being fed, both outright lies as well as lies of omission. No, things won't be perfect when 9/11 Truth becomes common knowledge. but it will manifest a new beginning, and hopefully, for while anyway, a good one.

Also, please note that the question of whether there are "Muslim terrorist organizations" is related but not identical to, "If the planes were hijacked, who were the hijackers?" If the planes are hijacked, the identity of the individual hijackers is obviously crucial in order to learn more about the overall plot, it's history, financiers, and so on, regardless of whether "Muslim terrorist organizations" (per se) exist en masse or not.

Just my 2 c

Broadly, regardless of what is or isn't in this particular story, TruthOut stinks.

Dees Illustrations Artwork inspired

This is actually the 3th major story of 9/11 whistleblowing this year unreported by big media- after Susan Lindauer und Behrooz Sarshar / Sibel Edmonds.

Let's poke holes in the cover-up, even in the media

It boggles my mind that some

It boggles my mind that some people are so willing to toss away a provable cover up handed to us on a silver platter. Something that could easily gain momentum and open the door to other areas of the 9/11 operation.

Yea, well

We’re In a Lot of

We’re In a Lot of Trouble
June 16, 2011
Author: Jon Gold
Source: 9/11 Truth News
Category: BLOG

“This Government has made me a victim of Conspiracy Theories, because they haven’t answered fully, or allowed anyone to ask the true questions of September 11th, and that’s what I’m asking from you today. For exposure. We are not crazy. We have questions. We demand answers.” [...] “We’re asking for a new investigation into the events of September 11th, and this time, a truly bipartisan, global, with families invested from the beginning, middle, and throughout the end.” – 9/11 Family Member Donna Marsh O’Connor at the National Press Club on September 11, 2006.

On June 13, 2011, reporter Jason Leopold, along with Jeffrey Kaye, broke a story about 9/11 that was released on The story appears “to cast further doubt on the official narrative and suggests high-level military and intelligence officials withheld key evidence from Congressional lawmakers probing the attacks.”

According to the report, “DoD officials held discussions about DO5′s intelligence activities between the summer of 2000 and June 2001 revolving around al-Qaeda’s interest in striking the Pentagon, the World Trade Center (WTC), and other targets. In other words, the Bush administration was fully aware the terrorist organization had set its sights on those structures prior to 9/11 and, apparently, government officials failed to act on those warnings.”

If true, this would further show that the multitude of statements made by Bush Administration officials and others after the attacks about not having “any inkling” about what was to come, was a lie. It would further show that the idea of a “failure of imagination” was also a lie (please also watch this).

How did the “9/11 Truth Movement” respond to this report? Unfortunately, truthout has removed the comments from the article. If you had the chance to read them, you would have seen people criticize the report as “Disinfo to sustain the bogus cover story.” You would have seen multiple statements about how this story doesn’t go far enough. That it doesn’t cover this theory or that theory. You would have even seen accusations against Jason Leopold. On other sites, people said this was “SLICK PROPAGANDA from Jason Leopold at Truncated TRUTHOUT.”

On truthout, I left a comment that said, “Thanks Jason for this article. This will help out your readers,” and I linked to my “Official 9/11 Justice Start-Up Kit.” Someone that is supposedly a member of the “9/11 Truth Movement” responded by saying, “nope, that’s just more racist limited hangout BS.”

Basically, it was a mess.

Over the years, I have spoken to many journalists that have written about discrepancies in the 9/11 narrative. I would show them this story, and that story, and hope that they would still have an interest in reporting on 9/11. The response I often got went like this: “Jon, I would, but every time I write about 9/11, I get bombarded by so-called members of the “9/11 Truth Movement” accusing me of this or that because I didn’t cover this or that. It’s become a circus now, and nobody wants to touch it.”

One thing people need to understand is that the media has not done its job with regards to 9/11. For the most part, it has attacked anyone that has questions about that day, and also not given many stories the attention that they deserve. This, in turn, has been very frustrating to many. I, myself, have gone “toe to toe” with journalists over the years, so I am not completely without fault. However, I have since learned from my mistakes, and no longer approach journalists with anger.

As I wrote in my facts piece, everyone has theories. Everyone has theories because those who should be able to answer our questions about that day, refuse to do so. It is human nature to theorize about what happened that day. However, and this is something I came to terms with long ago… We don’t know the truth about what happened that day. We don’t know who was ultimately responsible for what happened that day. This is a hard truth I’ve come to accept. I think because I’ve accepted this hard truth, I have become a better advocate for 9/11 Justice.

Many people in the “9/11 Truth Movement” think they know what happened that day and who was responsible. They don’t. I have read more than most on the subject, and I can honestly say that I don’t know. 9/11 was a crime, and as with every crime, there are suspects for that crime. If you look at ALL of the available information, you will see that elements within our Government and others have MORE THAN EARNED the title of suspect for the crime of 9/11. Along with people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Osama Bin laden. However, without having had a real investigation, we don’t know the full truth.

Veterans of this cause have tried to give advice before on how best to reach people. I have written countless “pointers” over the years to try and help people. It seems as though these attempts at giving advice have fallen on deaf ears.

This kind of behavior is unacceptable. It doesn’t help, and instead, pushes people away. They don’t want to participate, and I can honestly understand why. We are a movement that is desperately trying to get reporters to report on what some of us are saying, and the very people that may be able to help us are being pushed away. How sad is that?

Jason Leopold and Jeffrey Kaye wrote a story that exposed a lie. If we ignore the easy lies, which incidentally help to give credibility to the idea that we were lied to about that day and need real justice and accountability, then we are doomed to fail as a cause.

The 2,973 people that were brutally murdered that day, their family members, and the people of the world deserve better.

I admit to voting that down...

and I posted it!

Well . . .

Yes but people on here are basically just arguing about the behavior of those they disagree with. Jon said he posted a comment thanking the author, but nothing else is being done to gain momentum, that I can see, because people are too busy bashing each other.

The reality is that when real truths are exposed, campaigns to cover it up, or mire it in nonsense, etc., will converge on the source and move forward full force.

If it's so simple to derail our movement into focusing on the discrediting campaign, and essentially ignoring the content of the article, yes, we're in trouble. If we only REACT, instead of ACT, then yes, we're in trouble.

Let's assume that all those claiming "Limited Hangout" were instead claiming "hologram planes!".

Does it make sense to ONLY focus on debunking "hologram planes" if the content of the article is actually that important? I see nothing of substance in Jon's article about the CONTENT of the TruthOut story, nor in any of the comments on here.

Why? Because people polarized over one person's view that it was a limited hang-out.

Believe me, I support articles to debunk and expose false and nonsense claims. But in this case, that's all I'm seeing. So in this case I consider the discrediting effort to have won out.

Additionally, it's one thing to debunk and expose individuals or particular websites, but it's another to claim that the entire movement is at fault. That's simply untrue.

What is the article itself about?

I don't know. I have to instead waste time reading endless numbers of comments about what people within the movement think of each other.

Sounds like a real success, once again, for the "hologram plane!" people.

Some official might have revealed something, apparently, and it's on a silver platter, but what that was, I have no idea.

I think we can argue all day long here on blogger

just if we don't forgot to spread the new info to the world. Nevermind what this capitel means in the outcome, it's breaking news and should be handled so.

"Some official might have

"Some official might have revealed something, apparently, and it's on a silver platter, but what that was, I have no idea."

A cover up that leads straight to the Bush White House was handed to us on a silver platter, but it is dismissed as a limited hangout instead of an opportunity. An opportunity to open doors towards a proper investigation that could lead to exposing other areas of lies from that day.