Terror against the United States - the unanswered questions

Criminal Negligence or Treason
Commentary on a NY Times article
by Jared Israel [posted 15 September 2001]

  • "Police radio broadcasts 'This was a terrorist attack. Notify the Pentagon.' 9:08 a.m."
    ('Daily News' [New York], 12 September 2001, NEWS SECTION, p. 24: THE TRAGIC TIMELINE, our emphasis)
    [Note: This was after the first and second planes had struck the WTC Towers. The third plane is said to have hit the Pentagon 35 minutes later, at 9:43 am.]

  • "In Sarasota, Fla., Bush was reading to children in a classroom at 9:05 a.m. when his chief of staff, Andrew Card, whispered into his ear. The president briefly turned somber before he resumed reading. He addressed the tragedy about a half-hour later. "
    ('AP' 12 September 2001, our emphasis)

  • "President Bush listened to 18 Booker Elementary School second-graders read a story about a girl's pet goat Tuesday before he spoke briefly and somberly about the terrorist attacks."
    (Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 12 September 2001, p. A20, HEADLINE: 'Bush hears of attack while visiting Booker' [Note: The school was Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Fla.])

We are not soothsayers.

We cannot say with certainty what happened on September 11, 2001 - that is, what really happened, behind the scenes.

But the following report from the semi-official 'N.Y. Times' makes it clear that either Americans are being lied to by the those in the highest places - which if true has the gravest implications - or else the rulers of Washington's New World Order are criminally negligent.

In analyzing the 9-11 nightmare, we were puzzled by the official response to the so-called third plane. That is the one that left Dulles Airport, flew to Ohio, near the West Virginia and Kentucky borders, turned around, flew back to Washington and struck the Pentagon.

Concerning this plane, we asked: how could it stay in the air, hijacked, for almost an hour after two other hijacked planes had struck the WTC Towers, and not be seen by U.S. air defense forces? How could it fly to the Midwest, turn around and fly back to Washington and hit the Pentagon without being spotted and therefore intercepted?

The 'N.Y. Times' published the following explanation (September 15, 2001):

"During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 was under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the Pentagon, military officials in a command center on the east side of the building were urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do."

"But despite elaborate plans that link civilian and military efforts to control the nation's airspace in defense of the country, and despite two other jetliners' having already hit the World Trade Center in New York, the fighter planes that scrambled into protective orbits around Washington did not arrive until 15 minutes after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon."

This explanation makes matters worse.

If it was difficult to believe that the third plane was not spotted, then it is a good deal harder to believe that it was spotted and tracked for over half an hour and yet nothing was done because officials "didn't know what to do."

Why didn't they force the plane down and failing that, shoot it down? Before you think, "Because, as the article says, they didn't have a procedure for handling such an occurrence," note the following comment from deputy defense secretary Wolfowitz. Talking about the fourth plane, the one that crashed in Pennsylvania:

"Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, said today that the Pentagon had been tracking that plane and could have shot it down if necessary; it crashed about 35 minutes after the Pentagon crash." ('N.Y. Times, Sept. 15, 2001)

"Could have shot it down if necessary."

If they "could have shot" down the fourth plane, why did they not shoot down the third? Once they knew these were suicide hijackings - and surely they knew that by around 9:00 am - why would they wait?

And why, if they really were confused about what to do, why, after the Commander in Chief was informed about what was happening, didn't he immediately convene an emergency meeting to discuss the issue? Why did he keep reading to children and listening to stories about goats while the 3rd plane flew towards Washington?

Officials knew the first and second planes had hit highly visible symbols of US power. They knew this third plane was heading back to Washington. Couldn't they be reasonably sure that the target was a symbol of US power in Washington? Then why didn't they fully evacuate the Pentagon?

The White House has tried to confuse the issue regarding this question. They claim the plane changed course - that originally it was heading for the White House:

"Top government officials have suggested that American Airlines Flight 77 was originally headed for the White House and possibly circled the Capitol building." (CBS News, Sept. 21, 2001)

But according to CBS, this is not the case:

"CBS News Transportation Correspondent Bob Orr reports that's not what the recorded flight path shows." (ibid.)

Says CBS:

"Eight minutes before the crash, at 9:30 a.m. EDT, radar tracked the plane as it closed to within 30 miles of Washington. Sources say the hijacked jet continued east at a high speed toward the city, but flew several miles south of the restricted airspace around the White House.

"At 9:33 the plane crossed the Capitol Beltway and took aim on its military target. But the jet, flying at more than 400 mph, was too fast and too high when it neared the Pentagon at 9:35. The hijacker-pilots were then forced to execute a difficult high-speed descending turn.

"Radar shows Flight 77 did a downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes.

"The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it's clear there was no fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver suggests the hijackers had better flying skills than many investigators first believed.

"The jetliner disappeared from radar at 9:37 and less than a minute later it clipped the tops of street lights and plowed into the Pentagon at 460 mph." (ibid.)

The White House denies this:

"At the White House Friday, spokesman Ari Fleischer saw it a different way."

"That is not the radar data that we have seen," Fleischer said, adding, "The plane was headed toward the White House." (ibid.)

If the White House is right and CBS is wrong, why did the 'Times' report that:

"During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 was under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the Pentagon, military officials in a command center on the east side of the building were urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do." ('N.Y. Times,' Sept. 15, 2001)

Given the stories from CBS and the 'Times,' and given that the plane did in fact hit the Pentagon, aren't the news reports more believable than the White House denial?

And since in any case there could be no way of being absolutely sure where the plane would strike, why weren't all the most sensitive buildings evacuated to prevent:

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Up to 800 people may have died Tuesday when a hijacked commercial airliner was crashed into the Pentagon, officials said.

"Firefighters were still battling a fire on the west side of the 29-acre, 6 million-square-foot building late Tuesday, more than 12 hours after the crash. Washington hospitals reported 71 people injured, some severely, and another 100 to 800 were still listed as missing and possibly dead late Tuesday. " (CNN at http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/pentagon.terrorism/)

And why wasn't this plane, the third plane, forced down or failing that, shot down?

Regarding the fourth plane:

"Asked if rules of engagement would have allowed the Air Force to shoot the plane down, [deputy defense secretary] Wolfowitz said: 'I think it was pretty clear at that point that that airliner was not under the pilot's control and that it was heading to do major damage.'

"He said any military intervention would have ultimately been the decision of President George W. Bush....

"Forty minutes passed between the time New York's second World Trade Center tower was struck and another commandeered plane crashed into the Pentagon..." ('Reuters', Sept. 15, 2001)

So what do we have here?

A) Officials knew that the third plane, and quite possibly the second, was set to strike important targets.

B) They tracked the third plane for at least half an hour.

C) Supposedly George Bush, Jr. needed to approve shooting the plane down.

D) But instead of going into an emergency meeting, he continued his visit to an elementary school, hearing about goats.

What we have here is either criminal negligence beyond belief, and that includes the Commander in Chief, who hearing that planes are destroying the country focuses on goats, or b) the 'N.Y. Times' piece is repeating a cover story whose purpose is to explain away the obvious flaw in the original story: namely, that a plan could be hijacked in Ohio, and fly all the way back to Washington without being spotted.

And if the 'N.Y. Times' story is a lie, then those who fed the 'Times' this lie are guilty of conspiracy. They are people in high places and they are directly involved in the murder of God knows how many people in N.Y. as well as the 800 casualties the media speaks of in Washington either because they planned these attacks, perhaps working through Islamist groups secretly controlled by the CIA or they knew the attacks were going to happen and wanted to let them happen. The obvious motive: to create a seeming justification for extreme military action. And that is why they did not allow the Air Force to stop possibly the second and certainly the third planes.

So there you have it - either criminal negligence, including Mr. Bush who reads about goats while his countrymen are slaughtered, or treason.

Given these amazing facts, available in the mainstream media, why is there no call for an investigation?

Mr. Bush has called for bringing those responsible to justice. Let us begin at home.