9/11 – The Unofficial Story
Journalists, academics, engineers and security analysts have raised serious questions about the official commission report of 9/11, claiming it was designed to give the public a false, distorted view of the most serious attack on the US since Pearl Harbor. They claim it used misinformation, omission and lies, in an attempt to paper over malfeasance and complicity in the planning and execution of the terrorist attacks.
In a variety of investigations into the events, their combined findings lead to a picture in which “unknown parties” were behind a plan to clamp down on the freedoms of the American public, to set the stage for a resurgence of the military-industrial complex, leading to a New American Century, similar to the period following Pearl Harbor.
To many who were directly affected by the 9/11 events, their combined findings so far – in an ongoing process of investigation – provide alarming reading. While many of their findings have been written off as “conspiracy theories” - the implication being that they should not be taken seriously - the investigations and claims deserve serious study.
So far there has been no indepth independent investigation into the most dramatic attack on the United States since the 1941 Pearl Harbor attacks.
Mizzima Weekly has carried out a survey of two websites which were most active following the release of the report.
The first, www.9/11truth.org, has an article, “The top 40 reasons to doubt the official story,” which is an amalgamation of faults that it says undermine the commission’s conclusions. The summary of the faults cited are linked to more detailed information. The allegations include, in no particular order of importance:
1. The report was designed to weaken the Constitution: “The USA PATRIOT Act was written before 9/11,” it said, and plans for a “Shadow Government” were developed before 9/11. Plans for rounding up dissidents “as a means for suppressing civil disturbance have been in the works for decades.”
2. 9/11 was used as the pretext to create a new, extra-Constitutional executive authority to declare anyone an “enemy combatant” (including American citizens), to detain persons indefinitely without habeas corpus, and to “render” such persons to secret prisons where torture is practiced.
3. Was the hijacked passenger jet believed to be headed to the White House or Congress shot down? Did the crash occur at 10:06 (according to a seismic report) or 10:03 (according to the 9/11 Commission)? Does the Commission wish to hide what happened in the last three minutes of the flight, and if so, why? Was Flight 93 shot down, as indicated by the scattering of debris over a trail of several miles?
4. What caused the collapse of a third skyscraper, known as WTC 7, which was not hit by a plane? Were the Twin Towers and WTC 7 brought down by explosives? (See “The Case for Demolitions” on two websites: wtc7.net and 911research. wtc7.net, and an article by physicist Steven Jones.
5. Disposing of the Crime Scene: The rapid and illegal scrapping of the structural steel in WTC ruins at Ground Zero disposed of to percent any investigation of the mechanics and physics of the buildings’ collapse?
6. About 25 percent of another report, called the U.S. Congressional Joint Inquiry, was redacted, including long passages regarding how the attack (or the network allegedly behind it) was financed. Was the redacted portion removed to cover-up the involvement of Saudi Arabia? US Senator Lindsey Graham later said foreign allies were involved in financing the alleged terror network, but that this would only come out in 30 years.
7. The membership and staff of the 9/11 Commission displayed numerous conflicts of interest. The families of victims called for the resignation of Executive Director Philip Zelikow, a former Bush administration member. Commission member Max Cleland resigned, condemning the entire exercise as a “scam” and “whitewash.”
8. The 9/11 investigation made little mention that members of Bin Ladin’s clan, during the no-fly period in the days following the attack, were allowed to fly out of the country, and it ignored the long-standing Bush family business ties to the Bin Ladin family fortune. (A company in which both families held interests, the Carlyle Group, was holding its annual meeting on September 11, with George Bush Sr., James Baker, and two brothers of Osama Bin Ladin in attendance.)
9. The Need for a “New Pearl Harbor:” Principals in the area of US foreign policy under the Bush administration (including Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and others) were instrumental in calling for plans to develop a worldwide military hegemony, including an invasion of the Middle East, dating back to the Ford, Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations. They reiterated these plans in the late 1990s as members of the “Project for a New American Century” report, and stated a clear intent to invade Iraq for the purpose of “regime change.” After 9/11, they lost no time in their attempt to tie Iraq to the attacks.
10. Perpetual “War on Terror”: 9/11 fallout was designed to provide carte-blanche for an open-ended, global and perpetual “War on Terror” against any enemy, foreign or domestic, that the executive branch chooses to designate,