9/11 inside job “impossible to conceal,” says Vladimir Putin

Published: 02 August, 2011 - by Robert Bridge
Russia Today 

Claims that the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 were orchestrated by US intelligence agencies are "complete nonsense," Prime Minister Vladimir Putin told attendees of a youth forum.

­"This is complete nonsense, it is impossible," Putin said on Monday, responding to a question posed by an attendee of the Seliger 2011 youth forum.

"To imagine that US intelligence services did it deliberately, with their own hands, is complete nonsense," the prime minister said. “Only people who do not understand the workings of security agencies can say that. It would be impossible to conceal it.”

Putin added that he could not imagine how "any of the current or former US leaders could have such an idea."

As the 10th anniversary of 9/11 approaches, skepticism over the official explanation of the 9/11 attacks appears to be on the rise. 9/11 “truth movements,” made up of diverse individuals from around the world, are demanding an independent investigation into those horrific events that changed the course of history.

The International Center for 9/11 Studies, for example, is sponsoring four days of Citizen Hearings in the city of Toronto, Canada with the goal of examining “the best evidence that has been discovered in the ten years since the 9/11 events occurred.”

A group of academics – including Niels Harritt, Associate Professor at the University of Copenhagen; Steven Jones, Professor Emeritus from Brigham Young University and Kevin Ryan, former Underwriters Laboratories manager – will be among the participants who hope to persuade the public of the need for another 9/11 investigation.

There will certainly be no shortage of protesters on hand as well to condemn the “conspiracy theorists.”

The events of 9/11 were not only the worst foreign attacks ever to happen on American soil. They also triggered a global “War on Terror,” which led to two full-scale wars among other less clearly defined military operations, and provided the impetus for a robust increase in US military spending (which has leveled off at just below $1 trillion per year).

According to the official version of events, the attacks of 9/11, organized by the now-deceased Al-Qaeda terror master, Osama bin Laden, left almost 3,000 people dead after a group of 19 terrorists hijacked four commercial jets.

The four pirated aircraft crashed into the North and South Towers of the World Trade Center complex in Manhattan, New York, the Pentagon building in Washington, and an open field just outside of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Posted Comments:

James Eastfield August 03, 2011, 08:54 quote "Putin is quite correct; it WAS impossible to conceal it - which is why the numerous 9-11 Truth movements exist.

Jayr. August 02, 2011, 18:22 quote "Then investigate without negligence or omissions and see what falls out.The reactions of the media and politicians makes one think that there is no need to investigate and this is a red flag."

Samuel Fougdelain August 03, 2011, 09:38 quote "In a sense he is right - they couldn't conceal it. I understand where Putin is coming from, though. He would not 'burn' a fellow controller."

RT Story: http://rt.com/politics/9-11-putin-seliger-investigation-toronto/

The Seliger 2011 Youth Forum

Seliger 2011 youth forum - "The Seliger youth forum has kicked off in western Russia as the next generation of the country's 'movers and shakers' come together to exchange ideas and present their vision of the future.

20,000 young people from Russia and more than 80 other countries have joined up to take part in the event and exchange ideas."

Putin has been acccused of benefitting from a false flag op too.

That being the case, it's natural he would rather let "sleeping dogs lie" and not give any credibility to the notion that governments might engage in false flag ops against their own people.

There is a lot of evidence that the series of Russian apartment bombings which occurred in September 1999, killing 293 people and injuring 651 and which brought Vladimir Putin to power, were actually committed by Russian State security services mainly the FSB.

This evidence comes from a number of sources including an eye witness who saw subsequently arrested FSB agents planting bags of explosives at one apartment block in Ryazan, the explosive expert who defused the bomb, an apparent confession by an ex GRU officer and much investigation by brave independent journalists and reporters many of whom paid with their lives for speaking out. This included the famous investigative reporter Anna Politkovskaya who was executed on Putin’s birthday (seen as a message by many) and Alexander Litvinenko the ex Russian spy who wrote about the bombings, accused Putin for Anna’s execution and was executed by being poisoned in London two weeks later.

The bombings which were the largest series of coordinated terrorist attacks in Russia’s history were used as a pretext for going to war with Chechnya again and brought the ex KGB agent Vladimir Putin to power as a popular but authoritarian strong man.

More at: http://www.darkpolitricks.com/fsb-apartment-bombing-false-flag-attack/


The Ryazan detonator examined by local police:


Putin Either Naive Or Complicit In Own Black Ops

The latter is more likely.

Big governments operate like organized crime families. They might take occasional shots at each other but will also protect secret details of the games they play, from an enemy common to all governments - an informed public.

In the case of 9/11 (*amongst other things), Putin's full of it.

When making the case against "government involvement", shills rely on propagating an absurdist fallacy.

The debunkers claim that "the government" is too large, too inefficient and too dysfunctional to be able to keep secrets, such as the funding, planning and execution of 9/11. That, on face value, is correct, when taking that claim literally. In reality, "the government" is employs hundreds of thousands of people in a diverse spread of institutions including the US Post Office, the National Weather Service, the IRS, NASA and a plethora of alphabet soup departments, agencies and bureaux. Are they claiming that every government employee would have known about 9/11 beforehand, and be able to keep that secret? On the surface they are, but unfortunately, many people are fooled into believing an absurdity as if it its a valid point.

Mr. Putin and others who toe that similar line would have a hard time debunking the "inside job" scenario if they chose a reality-based situation, such as, for an example: "a small group of highly trained experts, under a compartmentalized structure within the US defense/intelligence community, sworn to absolute secrecy, executed the attacks on the orders of high ranking personnel within the defense department". After all, if it took "19 rookie kids with no military or paramilitary skills, and minimal piloting ability" to pull off this operation, then how many "top guns" with all the necessary skill sets, access and funding would it take? 200,000+?

Too Grand a Conspiracy?

Too Grand a Conspiracy?

Was the involvement of just too many people required to pull off the so-called 'conspiracy theory' posited by the 9/11 Truth movement? Defenders of the 'official story' say yes. They claim the theory is too far-fetched because it is a plan that would have had to involve far too many people, far too many 'conspirators' to so smoothly have been pulled off. The idea being that at some point one of the 'conspirators' would have talked and/or come forward and/or refused to participate, etc. Some debunking websites and papers even claim the conspiracy would have needed the involvement of hundreds of people all coordinated not only operationally, but in their deviousness as well. And at first glance, this seems a reasonable point to make.

But there are ultimately two main problems with the argument. Firstly, it does not in any way answer any of the hard, relevant evidence relating to the case and narrative of 9/11 covered in this paper that does point to some kind of conspiracy. Instead, it is simply a stated notion of disbelief. And secondly, there did not, in actual fact, need to be that many people involved with the overall vision, of every detail and every implication of the plan. There only needed to be a select few people at the top of the chain of command who knew exactly what was being carried out, where and how to create confusion, and why. The military and intelligence community is made up of people accustomed to following orders, without question. And many researchers who have spent time in the CIA and military intelligence have stepped forward into the 9/11 truth movement to explain the notion of 'compartmentalization'. A phenomenon and strategy that explains why not very many people need be in on the overall plan and execution of a covert operation for it to be successful.

"Compartmentalization is an organizational strategy analogous to the old parable of the blind men and an elephant -- each of the men is asked to describe what the elephant is, and all accurately describe their perception (trunk, tusk, legs, ears, tail, body), but none of them understand what the entire elephant is. Covert operations succeed by keeping most of the participants focused on their particular task, unaware of the full situation. Compartmentalization means that only key people in key places need to know what their role in a covert operation is -- others nearby might not be aware of those ensuring the success of the operation. This practice refutes the claim that too many people would have had to know about 9/11 for a conspiracy to allow it to have been possible."

So, in other words, one person turns a particular screw here, another punches up a computer war game over there, someone else is told to 'mock-up' a phantom airplane to challenge controllers involved in the war game over there, another is told to leak a piece of information next door, another is told to delete some damaging information to protect their department downstairs, a commander from a squadron is told by his superiors that communication has been lost with the Pentagon and to 'wait' for further orders, tapes and testimony from principals involved are either 'lost', 'classified', or outright destroyed, and a few at the top who do know exactly what is happening just go on stirring the pot of chaos and confusion, pumping out subsequent PR material through their public network of channels to rewrite the story into everyone's consciousness before anyone has recovered sufficiently from the 'shock and awe' to start connecting the disparate dots.

For the particularly heavy and devious work - like the planting of explosives in the Towers, the aeronautical maneuvers and modifications, etc. - is it such a stretch to think that foreign mercenaries, with no emotional investment whatsoever in the well-being of potential victims, and with ample experience in all sorts of covert intelligence and military operations could be brought in to carry out the dirty work? Conservative and Nationalist elements within Israel benefited as much from 9/11 as did our own Neo-Con faction. Surely the Mossad has amply trained operatives with enough experience in counter-intelligence, weaponry, and explosives to have pulled off the rigging of the Towers and other sensitive aspects of the mission. Especially if they were being aided and abetted by folks with high-level security clearance in our own government. And indeed, there are well-documented stories of multiple Israeli links to 9/11, including a group of Israeli nationals arrested for some very bizarre behavior on the morning of 9/11. "(Counterpunch) has put together a phenomenal synthesis of the highly suspicious Israeli intelligence activities in the U.S. on and before 9/11. An enormous network of 'art students', many of whom were located just blocks from the (alleged) 9/11 hijackers; and a small group of five or six Israeli intelligence operatives who were witnessed by many celebrating on a rooftop, with surveillance equipment, very soon after the first plane hit the Trade Center."

Fear and intimidation are effective silencing tools that keep important stories like this out of the mainstream press. (See the Joseph Wilson and Valerie Plame story as an exposed example of how this intimidation works.) And surely this story of Israel's connection to 9/11 is worth pursuing. But there are certain stories that the elite decision makers of this country will simply not allow to be printed in the major U.S. newspapers. The control of the flow of information, whether overt or subversive, is an age-old art. Again, think of the lead-up to the Iraq War and all the important information and analysis that wasn't printed. Is it really such a stretch to think that certain rogue elements within our own government are here again engaged in similar campaigns of cover-up and misinformation, fully confident the corporate media will not investigate, nor hold them accountable? Has not this control and spin of information been manipulated by governments for centuries? Are we 'Americans' really so different than the rest of humankind and human history? Has not the Bush/Cheney Administration gotten virtually every point on their policy wish list checked off as a result of 9/11? Do not the people who benefited most from 9/11 hold positions of immense power up and down the ranks of public and private decision-making organizations throughout the world? Is not the story of 19 bearded Arab men under the direction of a man in a cave in Afghanistan thwarting a multi-trillion dollar defense industry armed only with box-cutters the absurd conspiracy theory in need of our skepticism and derision?

David Ray Griffin, one of the leading scholars in the 9/11 truth movement, in response to this same notion that the theory put forth by the 9/11 truthers is just too grand a conspiracy to pull off, wrote this: "Another popular argument is that in any 'vast conspiracy…there's the likelihood that someone along the chain would squeal.' Even this administration - (defenders of the official story argue) - 'could never have acquiesced in so much human slaughter and kept it a secret. Especially when so many people would have to have been involved.' Although this argument may seem strong at first glance, it becomes less impressive under examination.

"This argument is, for one thing, based partly on the belief that it is impossible for big government operations to be kept secret very long. However, the Manhattan Project to create an atomic bomb, which involved some 100,000 people, was kept secret for several years. Also, the United States provoked and participated in a civil war in Indonesia in 1957 that resulted in some 40,000 deaths, but this illegal war was kept secret from the American people until a book about it appeared in 1995. It also must be remembered that if the government has kept several other big operations hidden, we by definition do not know about them. We cannot claim to know, in any case, that the government could not keep a big and ugly operation secret for a long time.

"A second reason to question this a priory objection is that the details of the 9/11 operation would have been known by only a few individuals in key planning positions. Also, they would have been people with a proven ability to keep their mouths shut. Everyone directly complicit in the operation, moreover, would be highly motivated to avoid public disgrace and the death penalty. The claim that one of these people would have come forward by now is irrational.

"When people suggest that whistleblowers would have come forward, of course, they usually have in mind people who, without being complicit in the operation, came to know about it afterward, perhaps realizing that some order they had carried out played a part in the overall operation. Many such people could be kept silent merely by the order to do so, along with the knowledge that if they disobeyed the order, they would be sent to prison or at least lose their jobs. (see Kevin Ryan as an example of this) For people for whom that would be insufficient intimidation, there can be threats to their families. How many people who have expressed certainty about whistleblowers would, if they or their families or their jobs would be endangered by coming forward with inside information, do so?

"In any case, the assumption that 'someone would have talked,' being simply an assumption, cannot provide a rational basis for refusing to look directly at the evidence." (From, Debunking 9/11 Debunking, by David Ray Griffin, pg.s 20 - 21, Olive Branch Press, 2007.)

This Excerpt was found on the web Site of Hard Facts - http://www.911hardfacts.com/index.htm
XX Too Grand a Conspiracy? http://www.911hardfacts.com/report_20.htm

From Same Site : Conclusions

The only thing keeping the truth about 9/11 from emerging is our collective desire to continue to spin the fairy tale we have been fed.

We have an emotional investment in what it means to be American. We have an emotional investment in trusting and believing in the goodness of our 'leaders'. We have an emotional investment in the correctness of our initial reaction to the events of 9/11, and in the goodness of the justice we pursued thereafter. We have an emotional investment in our belief about the veracity and democratic function of the press. To admit and accept the truth that is illuminated by the actual hard facts and data of 9/11 would unravel the threads of a narrative we have used over the past 5 years to literally define ourselves. To admit to the hard truth about 9/11 would be a literal death of a part of us.

But surely, in upholding this collective myth of 9/11, part of us is dying anyway. A much more central, vital part. All of us know that when we refuse to look at ourselves, and the world, honestly, we suffer. We are forced to live disconnected, unhappy, and wholly stressful lives. For whatever false images and versions of reality we have created will necessarily, and continuously, run up against the immovable certainty of the truth. In response, we will be forced to constantly manipulate our thoughts and actions, rearrange facts, polish our blinders, stick fingers in our ears, and engage in a perpetual state of denial to avoid that truth, struggling mightily to reestablish the more comforting feeling of our chosen myth. It is a full-time commitment, burden, and unequivocal waste of energy that will lead to a life of perpetual disconnect.


Obviously Putin

is one of them. Anyone like Putin who comes out with remarks like he made has got to be hiding something. It's so easy to keep something like 9/11 a secret the way all the Government Agencies are carpmentalized.

Putin's Right

Such a large conspiracy is too large to conceal and that's why it couldn't be kept secret. We're talking about it right now. Many people have been investigating it, researching it, asking questions about it. I don't think the secret lasted a year.

Mr. Putin

Tell it to the Chenyans Vlad.

Vladimir, what about the other question?

How do you feel about the official story? Does that make sense to you?

And doesn't Russia have a really high rate of, like, 9/11 Truthers? I've heard all kinds of great stuff on RT about it.

Putin's right...

The 9/11 inside job IS impossible to conceal, and it gets less concealed on a daily basis. Anyone who thinks Putin is naive or out of touch about 9/11 false flag terror should email me privately about some of the excellent bridges I now have for sale.

Putin Schmutin

First of all, Putin posits the false dilemma fallacy regarding 9/11.

Second, Putin is widely suspected to have given the order to kill Alexander Litvinenko. After all, on his deathbed, former FSB officer Litvinenko himself accused Putin directly. Litvinenko was also of the opinion that the FSB was behind Moscow Apartment bombings. Putin is a gigantic hypocrite.

if Putin were to accuse the US government of "orchestrating" 9/11, then (1) his claim would be inaccurate (false dilemma) and (2) he would do it only because he wishes to accelerate anti-American sentiment, not because he truly wishes to let the truth come to light.

On the other hand, if Putin denies the US had any hand in 9/11, his denial is worthless.

Meanwhile, Russian fighter planes keep intruding European airspace with regular intervals.

RE: Putin Schmutin

Neo-Conservative pundit Charles Krauthammer is quite the "truther" when it comes to supposed conspiracies orchestrated by Russia and the KGB, but is shocked, shocked by any suggestion of malfeasance and culpability on the part of US officials in 9/11.

A Tale of Two Columns:
No Mystery Here - "Some say that the Litvinenko murder was so obvious, so bold, so messy — five airplanes contaminated, 30,000 people alerted, dozens of places in London radioactive — that it could not have possibly been the KGB. But that’s the beauty of it. Do it obvious, do it brazen, and count on those too-clever-by-half Westerners to find that exonerating." Just like 9/11 Chuck!

Linking Bush to 9/11 Is Why Van Jones Had to Go - "He's gone for one reason and one reason only. You can't sign a petition demanding not one but four investigations of the charge that the Bush administration deliberately allowed Sept. 11, 2001 -- i.e., collaborated in the worst massacre ever perpetrated on American soil -- and be permitted in polite society, let alone have a high-level job in the White House."
Truth for thee, but not for me.

Impossible to Conceal?

"Not one big success of the Mossad has ever been made public.”
Ephraim Halevy, head of the Mossad from 1998 to 2002

Besides, what is the purpose of security and intelligence agencies if it is impossible to conceal information?

In context

One wouldn't expect a man who looks like a college professor to talk like James Bond. But, for 40 years, this British-born, soft-spoken gentleman has been one of the world's master spies. For four years, as Mossad chief, he controlled the agency's operations worldwide.

It was a lonely job. "You are sitting here in Israel, and people are operating in all kinds of places around the world, and you know very well that your capability to control what is happening is limited to what you instruct a, b or c to do. And I have often said to people, 'You know, in your bag, which you are carrying all the papers and instructions, you're carrying my head as well.'"

But over the years, it was more often other heads that have rolled, and that's what has given the Mossad its mystique: The capture of Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann in Argentina; the assassinations of PLO terrorists who massacred Israeli Olympians in Munich; the infiltration of Arab governments at the highest levels. But according to Halevy, there is so much more we'll never know.

"Not one big success of the Mossad has ever been made public," he says.

Among insiders, the Mossad is respected not just for its daring operations but for its intelligence gathering, and, for its predictions. Halevy has his share of these. He says, for example, that the year 2003 will be the most critical in Israel's life and that it will not be a good year for two of Israel's arch enemies, Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat.


It's not necessary to invoke precedents of secrets kept. The secret wasn't kept.

Furthermore, Putin has a point . . .

. . . about 9/11 being "impossible to conceal."

Hundreds of millions of people worldwide have figured it out. But as Prof. Griffin has pointed out, 9/11 was really a botched operation. (For heaven's sake, those boneheads couldn't even get a coherent story together to explain the lack of interceptions!)

So Mr. Putin, you have proved your own point—but only because this particular operation was run by idiots. The only thing that has covered them is the squeamishness of the American population.

If only it truly were 'botched'!

They know they don't need to fool each and every last one of us in order to fulfill their purpose. They just have to fool enough of the population enough of the time. There are those who don't see. There are those who won't see. There are those who haven't heard any of the basic points related to 9/11 that brought us around to rejecting the offical story.

Rather than marvel at how sloppy the perpetrators and accomplices were in regards to 9/11, we should instead appreciate that all that this demonstrates is just how careless they could afford to be, given how thoroughly controlled the news media are, and given the powerful force of denial in the public consicousness--both factors which they would have been well aware of even in advance of 9/11 itself. But sometimes, there are reactions in the truth movement that sound something like: 'Down with false-flag operations!...But if you're going to do a false-flag operation, at least have the decency to do it smoothly! Otherwise, that just makes the mass of the public even bigger jackasses when they fall for the official line than they would have been otherwise.'

The measure of whether or not a mission was 'botched' is not how we think the perps should have gone about things; but whether or not the perps got away with it, and how well the mission served the purposes which had given rise to it in the first place. They've been getting away with it for ten years now. That's not botched.

Where does the writer get this?

[At the Toronto Hearings]
"There will certainly be no shortage of protesters on hand as well to condemn the “conspiracy theorists.”

Looked at another way you could say the statement is true---The truth movement is an overwhelming protest of the official conspiracy theory (OCT).

Our voice is fact-based. The truth movement protest rips the OCT to shreds given a few moments of rational thinking.

Sorry,Vlad but,Terrorists

Sorry,Vlad but,Terrorists don't wait for redundancy.US Military does.NEADs waited for 3 levels B4 scrambling Langley:1.Prevent Jets from getting Mission orders (Borgstrom up as 3rd pilot) 2.If it fails,order jets to intercept ghost FL11(E-4B) NE of DC to allow FL77 to hit from SW. If that fails. 3.No shoot down Authority.Redundancy & plausible deniability=military.