News and Document archive source
copyrighted material disclaimer at bottom of page

NewsMine9-11questionscitizens-question — Viewing Item


911 questions not going away { May 18 2003 }

Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
   http://thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1052251602426&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

http://thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1052251602426&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

May. 18, 2003. 01:00 AM
Barbs aside, 9/11 questions aren't going away

MICHELE LANDSBERG

I was just listening to the latest CIA transmissions through the fillings in my molars last week when I accidentally intercepted a secret internal memo from the National Post.

It went something like this: "Post readership hits bottom, journalistic integrity under question, editor dumped, columnists fleeing sinking ship attack Toronto Star writer at once!"

Seriously, if I may be serious for a moment about the National Post, it was not so surprising to find myself the subject of a hostile editorial in that paper after I wrote about my unanswered 9/11 questions. The Post is a staunch voice for Bush America and brooks no dissenting voices. In tabloid fashion, it headed its editorial "Michele Landsberg Loses It."

I fully expected to be labelled a "conspiracy theorist" after interviewing Vision TV's Barrie Zwicker and writing about his challenges to the official version of what happened at the World Trade Center. But I was surprised by the nature of the ensuing attacks. The Post, and the dozen or so readers who were similarly enraged by my column, didn't come up with a single argument or documented fact. It was all quivering jowls, wild insults and expostulations.

The Post's entire argument, once I filtered out the verbiage ("crock", "nonsense," "comical," "embarrassing" and, that good old standby, "blinding hatred of the United States") came down to this: captured Al Qaeda commanders have confessed to the 9/11 crimes. End of story.

Except that what I was asking was a little different. Few of us doubt that murderous Saudi Arabian terrorists executed this massacre. But I wanted to know more. Why did the U.S. military, with the most powerful arsenal in world history, fail to prevent or at least try to stop a series of hijackings and crashes that went on for nearly two hours? Where was the Air Force?

If President Bush and his cabinet were not, at this very moment, still trying to censor, suppress and delay the publication of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11, if there had been honest disclosure and straight stories from the beginning, perhaps all these "dark questions," as the Post puts it, would never have arisen.

The great majority of people, sickened and overwhelmed by the horror of the attacks, unquestioningly accepts the White House version. Many thousands, however, are patiently stitching together the documented evidence and noting the huge holes in the fabric of that official story.

Just ask yourself how the United States, with its vast intelligence establishment and spy power, could have been caught unawares in such a drastic state of unpreparedness on Sept. 11.

President Bush, or, as he delights to call himself, the commander-in-chief, must certainly have been briefed about the ominous drumbeat of terrorist threats that were accumulating over the spring and summer of 2001. According to the report by Eleanor Hill, staff director for the Joint Inquiry, there had been "an unprecedented rise in threat" during that summer. U.S. government agencies had been warned by the intelligence community that there was a high probability of "spectacular" terrorist attacks by Al Qaeda "designed to inflict mass casualties. ... Attacks will occur with little or no warning."

The warnings included the possibility that airplanes would be used as weapons. There was even an April, 2001, intelligence report that terrorists planned "a spectacular and traumatic attack" like the first World Trade Center bombing, as well as an earlier report a group of Arabs planned to fly a plane into the World Trade Center or CIA headquarters.

According to Hill, these warnings went to "senior government officials" whom she was not allowed to name.

On that fateful morning, the first pictures of the burning tower were broadcast at 8:48 a.m. By then, according to a carefully documented timeline at http://www.cooperativeresearch.net, the Federal Aviation Administration, NORAD (joint U.S.-Canada air defence), the Pentagon, the White House and the Secret Service all knew that three commercial passenger jets had been hijacked.

Here begin the obfuscation and deceit, in small matters and large, that permeate the official narrative.

Disinformation was spewing all over the place that week after Sept.11. Serious newspapers actually reported that one hijacker's passport fluttered down from the roaring inferno to be found in the rubble by sharp-eyed intelligence officers.

The key question to me was one of air defence. There are, after all, standard procedures in the event of airplane emergencies. The FAA and NORAD have clear rules about any plane that suddenly loses radio contact with the tower or veers more than 15 degrees from its course.

Once the air traffic controller detects an emergency, he or she must inform aviation officials who alert NORAD. Fighter jets are then sent up to check out the straying plane, signal to it with dipped wings, escort it back on course or even force it down.

"We scramble aircraft to respond to any potential threat," said Marine Corps Maj. Mike Snyder, a NORAD spokesman, in an interview with the Boston Globe.

But it didn't happen that way on Sept. 11. The first reports from authoritative sources (NORAD's Snyder, Vice-President Dick Cheney and, most significantly, Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers) all stated that no jets took off until it was too late.

Just two days after the catastrophe, on Sept. 13, Gen. Myers was confirmed as the new chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. On that day, he told the Senate Armed Forces Committee that no Air Force jets got into the air until after the attack on the Pentagon.

On Sept. 15, The Boston Globe reported on a strange contradiction. The Globe quoted NORAD spokesman Snyder, who insisted that "the command did not immediately scramble any fighters even though it was alerted to a hijacking 10 minutes before the first plane ... slammed into the World Trade Center." He said the fighters remained on the ground until after the Pentagon was hit at 9:40 a.m. But The Globe also expressed puzzlement over the new official story that had just emerged. Now Americans were being told that fighter jets roared up from Cape Cod and from Virginia, but just didn't make it in time.

Furthermore, no explanation was ever offered for the bizarre fact that Andrews Air Force base, whose job it is to defend the U.S. capital just 19 kilometres away, had no fighter jets ready to go into action despite the months of serious warnings of impending terrorist attacks.

And these are the people we're to trust with a missile defence system? They can't even get their stories straight, let alone defend their air space.

According to The Post and to some of their hot-eyed followers, to ask these questions is to indulge in "poisonous delusions ... that do not belong in a mainstream newspaper." I'm not sure they're the proper arbiters of mainstream journalism, but I'm willing to be "unintentionally comical" in pursuit of understanding.

And Nostradamus rocks!

Just kidding.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michele Landsberg's column usually appears in the Star Saturday and Sunday. Her e-mail address is mlandsb@thestar.ca


36 percent americans suspect government involvement { September 9 2006 }
67 perc americans want wtc7 investigated { September 6 2007 }
911 activist on hunger strike to speak to mccain
911 conspiracy documentary tops google video
911 conspiracy theorists energized { August 6 2006 }
911 questions not going away { May 18 2003 }
911 stone movie prompts protester at rockville theater { August 10 2006 }
Ad campaign hidden story behind 911 { November 8 2004 }
Americans increasely question official 911 story { October 14 2006 }
Bruce willis questions governments 911 explanation { July 13 2006 }
Bush speech writer hints at inside job { April 13 2007 }
Bushdidit sign vancouver [jpg]
Canadians dont buy govt 911 story { May 26 2004 }
Chicago conference seeks 911 truth { June 5 2006 }
Cnn mar 23 2006 911 [jpg]
Cnn poll mar 23 2006 911 [jpg]
Cnnpoll [jpg]
Congressional candidate doubts arab links to 911 { November 8 2006 }
Conspiracy am radio rises to top 10 { November 12 2006 }
Conspiracy film shown by albany peace group { August 6 2006 }
Conspiracy theorist offers 100k prize
David lynch says there are questions about 911 { December 6 2006 }
Disturbing 911 skeptics no longer nutty fridge { August 5 2006 }
Dramatic public attitude on 911 says noam chomsky { December 19 2006 }
Editorial attacks 911 conspiracy theories { August 29 2006 }
Flood of americans question 911 { January 28 2006 }
French minister of housing questions 911 { July 6 2007 }
French official suggests bush behind 911 { July 7 2007 }
Gore vidal questions 911
Greens question prior knowledge
Group protests oliver stone 911 movie
Half american public doesnt trust 911 story { May 22 2006 }
Huge anti war rally includes 911 truth { January 28 2007 }
Iranian official says 911 only make believe { October 27 2006 }
Many americans suspect US government involvement in 911
Matthew rothschild tries to debunk 911 theories { September 11 2006 }
Media addresses loose change conspiracy { May 12 2006 }
Memorial day columbus 911 truth [jpg]
Minority angry about 911 shadowy plot run by americans { September 2 2006 }
Nation magazine shocked about 911 truth skeptics
New comic strip show questions 911 { October 30 2005 }
New york fire department chaplain doubts 911 official story { October 1 2005 }
New york poll questions 911 { September 1 2004 }
Oliver stone 911 movie angers conspiracy theories { August 8 2006 }
Philadelphia daily news questions on 911
Poll shows germany see us behind attacks
Protester gets arrested at oliver stone 911 movie
Retired airforce 911 conspiracy theorist wins house primarry { September 7 2006 }
Rosie odonnell attacked for questioning 911 { March 30 2007 }
Rosie odonnell attacked for views [jpg]
Sanfransisco chronicles long live 911 conspiracy theory { March 29 2006 }
State department responds to conspiracy theories { September 2 2006 }
Stop_9_11_woman_reading [jpg]
Students in grade school discuss loose change
Ten million people watched loose change
Third of americans suspect government behind 911
Usatoday slams conspiracy theories { March 2006 }
Venezuela president accepts 911 conspiracy theory
Vermont town to vote new 911 investigation { January 10 2007 }
Virgin atlantic shows loose change documentary [pdf]
Washington post covers alex jones LA conference { June 26 2006 }
WP POLL [jpg]
Zogby reveals half new yorkers believe 911 conspiracy { August 30 2004 }

Files Listed: 63



Correction/submissions

CIA FOIA Archive

National Security
Archives
Support one-state solution for Israel and Palestine Tea Party bumper stickers JFK for Dummies, The Assassination made simple