9/11 Cover up?
(Authored first in 2002, updated last in late 2004)
by Shaun Knapp

Bookmark and Share

"We do know there is a cover up going on," says University of Illinois Law Professor Francis Boyle in an interview now archived on the University of Illinois "Media Matters" with Bob McChesney site. The interview was given Sept. 29, 2002. Continuing his statement Law Professor Boyle says:

"The Bush Jr. Administration is desperately trying to keep whatever information from the public--whatever happened on Sept 11. Why? Who was behind this? Why did US intelligence agencies that did have this information not stop it. But it is clear that the United states government was already prepared to attack Afghanistan prior to September 11th."

Boyle is not alone in this accusation. Recently in the UK a great storm of controversy erupted when a long time (until earlier this past summer) minister of Tony Blair, Michael Meacher, stated that the US deliberately permitted the attacks of September 11, 2001 to occur. According the the Telegraph.uk.co,

"Mr Meacher listed a number of reports detailing intelligence that the US was said to have which warned of the September 11 attacks."

The Telegraph continues:

He questioned why military jets were not sent to intercept the hijacked passenger aircraft on the morning of the outrage two years ago. "Was this inaction simply the result of key people disregarding, or being ignorant of, the evidence? Or could US air security operations have been deliberately stood down on September 11? If so, why and on whose authority?" Mr Meacher wrote in The Guardian yesterday.

[Meacher] cited a document called Rebuilding America's Defenses, written in September 2000 by a neo-conservative think tank, Project for the New American Century, which was set up by a group that included Dick Cheney, the American vice president, Donald Rumsfeld, the defense secretary, and Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, which he called "a blueprint for US world domination".

He said the document stated that making America "tomorrow's dominant force" would be a long process without "some catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor".

The former minister's suggestion that there might have been a deliberate attempt to allow the September 11 attacks provoked a strong reaction from the US embassy in London.

. . . .His sweeping condemnation of the war on terrorism and suggestions of complicity in the September 11 attacks are likely to place him outside the political mainstream.

One report written by the great researcher and Tony award winning documentary film maker and author, G. Edward Griffin, gives us the following valuable information from a BBC interview. From Griffins report (PDF) we read:

Michael Springman was the former head of the U.S. Visa Bureau in Jeddah, Egypt. In June of 2001 (three months before the attack on the World Trade Center) he was interviewed on BBC News. This is what he said:

"In Saudi Arabia I was repeatedly ordered by high-level State Dept officials to issue visas to unqualified applicants. These were, essentially, people who had no ties either to Saudi Arabia or to their own country. I complained bitterly at the time there. I returned to the US, I complained to the State Dept here, to the General Accounting Office, to the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, and to the Inspector General’s office. I was met with silence…. What I was protesting was, in reality, an effort to bring recruits, rounded up by Osama bin Ladin, to the US for terrorist training by the CIA." (Has someone been sitting on the FBI?” an interview by Greg Palast, BBC News, June 11, 2001, (Article in Internet archive).

So now we have a law professor, a former British Minister speaking of cover up, The US visa Bureau head testifying that he was "ordered" to issue Visas to recruits of Osama Bin Laden?

Important are the references to the document "Rebuilding America's Defenses," something that should not be discounted by the skeptics.

The greatest development perhaps now comes with the bold and brave Stanley Hilton, political scientist, lawyer, Bob Dole’s former chief of staff, who is suing the government for 7 billion dollars for carrying out 9/11, as well as for racketeering. He is now the recipient of strong intimidation tactics including the trashing of his office as occurred on the same day he was to be interviewed for the first time in the Salt Lake City radio market in September 2004. Fortunately his life was not taken and he conducted that interview a week later on KTKK AM 630 at noon. Mr. Hilton cannot be ignored, even though Federal judges have ordered him to remain silent. Attorney General John Ashcroft has ordered him to cease his suit. From an interview with Alex Jones, Mr. Hilton tells of his very powerful evidences he has moving forward with his lawsuit against the corrupt traitors within the United States government who are responsible for the 911 attacks. From that interview he states:

"We are suing Bush, Condoleeza Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Mueller, etc. for complicity in personally not only allowing 9/11 to happen but in ordering it. The hijackers we retained and we had a witness who is married to one of them. The hijackers were U.S. undercover agents. They were double agents, paid by the FBI and the CIA to spy on Arab groups in this country. They were controlled. Their landlord was an FBI informant in San Diego and other places. And this was a direct, covert operation ordered,. . ."

Continuing we get this from Mr. Hilton:

"We have evidence both documentary as well as witness sworn statements from undercover former FBI agents, FBI informants, etc., that other officials in the Pentagon and the military and the Air Force that deal with the fact that there were many drills, many rehearsals for 9/11 before it happened. Bush had seen this simulated on TV many times. He blurted this out at a press conference in California a few months after 9/11 where he said he had, quote, 'seen the first plane hit the first building on the video.' And that’s not possible because there was no official video of that. There was one of the second plane not the first one. He had seen the first one.

We do have some incriminating documents that Bush personally ordered 9/11 events. It was well planned. A FEMA official has admitted on tape that he was there the night before – September 10th, that is …"

On "Now" with Bill Moyers, aired on PBS September 12, 2003 we hear about 4 woman made widows on September 11th 2001 when their husbands died in the World Trade Center. These woman have not been satisfied with the little or "official" government explanations for many questions they have. These courageous woman are asking tough questions, and in the vacuum of government answers, have begun to do their own organizing, and research.

From the transcript of the Now program found on the PBS.org web site we read some excerpts.

Narrator ZWERDLING: A lot of people think, we already know what happened on 9-11. It's been all over the news, and beside, Congress just released this investigative report about it couple months ago.

But this country has barely begun to learn the truth about 9-11… that's what the women say. And they want to make sure we eventually hear it.

Mrs BREITWEISER: "I've turned into a very disenchanted, fully awake, no longer naïve person, who's extremely driven."

Narrator ZWERDLING: Leaders in Congress said, "Don't worry, we're going to investigate 9-11." So the women were stunned when President Bush convinced Congress to back off. He reportedly told congressional leaders that a sweeping investigation might distract from the government's war on terrorism.

As a result, the congressional investigation focused mainly on the FBI and CIA. They never examined what the airlines, or the immigration service, or the White House did or didn't do. Then the women heard that some frustrated legislators were trying to launch another, broader investigation. But the President and his allies in Congress were trying to block that. That's when the women got together and said, "Let's organize a protest in Washington."

Mrs. BREITWEISER: We need a full independent investigation. We must ask the tough questions and seek out the difficult answers. We must as a country grow and be made stronger and safer by the bitter lessons learned on September 11.

Narrator ZWERDLING: But the New Jersey women figured they couldn't just trust that the commission would dig up the truth… so they started digging on their own.

They gathered mountains of information from the Internet and old newspapers. They took their binders to Washington. They met with members of Congress and spent days in hearings. They compared what different officials said, and began to find discrepancies and contradictions.

For instance: government officials say they can't establish an exact timeline for the events on 9-11. They can't even confirm exactly what time each plane was hijacked… or exactly what time they learned that the planes were hijacked.

Mrs. KLEINBERG: I sat in that hearing, and a Lieutenant Colonel at NORAD is saying that, "You know, the times in the log book that we have written down might not be the exact time that the event happened. It could have just been when the person went and logged it in."

And I'm thinking, This is the military. Aren't these the guys that say "0-eight-hundred," and you know, have everything to the second? And you know, is that not what we know about them?

And now you have this catastrophic event, and you got a call in about a hijacking, and it didn't get logged at the exact time? I mean, it doesn't make common sense.

Narrator ZWERDLING: The women found government documents that spell out exactly what officials are supposed to do the moment that a plane goes off course or cuts off its signals to ground control… or does anything unexpected. And they read that NORAD sent up fighter jets dozens of times in the year before the attack to check out erratic aircraft. So the women wondered, what happened on 9-11?

Mrs BREITWEISER: On the morning of September 11th we had four planes drastically off their flight path transponders disconnected and the FAA procedure and protocol to notify NORAD and for NORAD to scramble fighter jets were not followed. And it wasn't like they all happened in the course of an hour. What I think is very frustrating is looking back when I speak to people they say, "Well it happened in such a short span of time."

It did not happen. It happened over the course of two hours. You're telling me over the course of two hours Andrews Air Force Base in the Washington, DC area which houses F-16s which fly cover for Air Force One could not get a plane up in the air to cover the Pentagon?

Thank heavens there are some sources that are getting out. As these widows have gained some prominence in their search they now have people beginning to come forward to them with information. They state:

We met with an air traffic controller from Newark who flat out said to us, "Look, you know. I don't know what happened. All he could tell us is that the FBI showed up, took all of their files, all of their recordings, and walked out."

It seems from all reports that indeed, the White House is not wanting the truth to get out. Frequently we heard grumbling's and complaints from the congressional investigators that the White House was working against them, not providing requested information. There are many other sources of information on these vital issues, none of which will appear on the nightly news anytime soon it seems. Investigative Journalists have complained that they are stopped dead in their tracks at all inquiries to the airlines who tell them it's in the hands of the FBI. It's obvious they don't get answers from government. Now, we have had our sham of a 911 commission.

The Philadelphia Inquirer recently and boldly published 20 unanswered questions by journalist William Bunch about 9-11. I list only the questions, his article however tries to give some answers to each question and gives good information on just why the question should be asked. I invite all skeptics to do some reading of their own and look up the web version of this article containing links. About half of his questions I list here, minus the valuable follow up information which can be found in full context here:

1. What did National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice tell President Bush about al Qaeda threats against the United States in a still-secret briefing on Aug. 6, 2001?

2. Why did Attorney General John Ashcroft and some Pentagon officials cancel commercial-airline trips before Sept. 11?

3. Who made a small fortune "shorting" airline and insurance stocks before Sept. 11?

4. Are all 19 people identified by the government as participants in the Sept. 11 attacks really the hijackers?

6. Why did the NORAD air defense network fail to intercept the four hijacked jets?

7. Why did President Bush continue reading a story to Florida grade-schoolers for nearly a half-hour during the worst attack on America in its history?

11. Why were Donald Rumsfeld and other U.S. officials so quick to link Saddam Hussein to the attacks?

12.Why did 7 World Trade Center collapse?

19. What is in the 28 blacked-out pages of the congressional Sept. 11 report?

There was a joint effort by two journalists who analyzed all news stories and searched long and hard, they have come to the same conclusion as the 4 New Jersey Widows: Lots of contradictions from government, timelines don't add up. I've read their research and I find it comes nothing short of "Cover up" by the Bush White House.

Professor Boyle continues in his words about cover up:

"The Governments account of what happened does not add up. . . . Now, finally, Bush Jr.-- kicking and screaming -- has agreed to an independent investigation. He is trying to exclude access to intelligence sources--with good reason--he doesn't want us to really know really what was going on behind the scenes. We also have to pay attention to the stacking this independent commission with people who will go along with a cover up. I think the American people must demand from their members in Congress that we have an open, public investigation here by a joint committee of congress --like Watergate--with subpoena powers to be able to demand anyone from the FBI, CIA, NSA, DIA and military to come in and explain 'what about these war preparations against Afghanistan?' What did US Intelligence Agencies know? Why did they not act on on the information that they had?"

There is indeed a cover up going on and numerous unanswered questions to boot. Unfortunately too many American's blindly believe that their leaders in Washington (especially those "professing" religiosity as a ravening wolf professes his cloak of wool is truly his own) can't be guilty of misdeeds. As long as the dominant political opinion take offence at the notion that there may be grave scandal behind 9-11 we may have to wait another 50 years before serious truth of the real facts come forth, just as we are finding with Pearl Harbor today.

Some of this "unofficial" analysis surely will be looked upon with skepticism and disdain by those who think G. Bush walks on water, and perhaps rightly so. Who can argue, however, that there are many unanswered questions that must be addressed by an investigation having full subpoena power as Professor Boyle says we should demand of Congress to make. The investigation we've had is admittedly shallow and incomplete by those who were on the committee. It's a sham of unparalleled proportions. Fortunately there is one man in the Congress who adheres to the US Constitution, see what he says about the phony 911 commission. Perhaps the American People might awaken and demand answers before the next tragedy strike us, but given the way the majority suck up the "official" propaganda line, the real truth of what happened on 9-11 may only be marginalized as "conspiracy theory." Fortunately however, New Yorkers believe there has been government knowledge or complicity to the tune of 49% as indicated by the Zogby poll in the fall of 2004. This gives hope that the percentage of critical thinkers of today's America are greater in number than those of Germany in the 1930's. These would be people not easily seduced by the powerful propaganda. Most Germans upheld the rise of a dictatorship and the dismantling of their republic following the Nazi planned, and secretly orchestrated, terrorist act: The Burning of the Reichstag. May we Americans "awake to a sense of our awful situation" because of this "secret combination" which has now been built up above us, which seeks to "destroy the freedom of all nations, lands, and countries."