[lbo-talk] NYP: Nine Hundred and Eleven Missing Pieces

Michael Pollak mpollak at panix.com
Sat Jan 3 02:05:03 PST 2004


[Everyone knows there are unanswered questions about 911. There couldn't not be. The pressure was too huge to come together immediately and stop criticizing for the investigation not to have been given too much closure too soon. That would have been true even if so much of it wasn't by necessity so unprecedented, encoded or unknowable.]

[I personally am in favor of anything that would make this government's life difficult. And I'm especially for anything that might cap the wellspring of legitimacy for militaristic meglomania that 911 now represents.]

[And yet, so far, I've yet to see any survey of What We Don't Know that didn't make me feel uncomfortable -- as if simply affirming there were things we don't know would require me to defend a half dozen half formed conspiracy theories.]

[The below seems to me like an exception -- the first version of What We Don't Know where, whatever the ultimate facts, the overall narrative style seems so consistently calm and rational that one could at least imagine a common league forming between conspiracy nuts and those of us who simply believe in airing incompetence and embarrassments for political effect.]

[I sure wish the author had another name, though :o)

http://www.nypress.com/16/53/news&columns/feature.cfm

January 1, 2004

The New York Press

Volume 16, Issue 53

Nine hundred and Eleven Missing Pieces

What don't we know, and why don't we know it?

By Alan Cabal

The Southern Solstice has passed, and with it the deadline for 9/11

families to file their claims with the "Feinberg Fund," as it has come

to be known. Of an official death toll of 2976, claims have been filed

by for 2,851. The claim involves signing off on any future litigation

against the government, the airlines, the airports or any security

firms.

One hundred and twenty-five claims remain outstanding, but little has

been written about any of these families. Where is the coverage of

those insisting on finding out what really happened on that day before

they sign away their "claims?"

First to stand up were five widows: Kristen Breitweiser, Patty

Casazza, Mindy Kleinberg and Lorie van Auken. Breitweiser's husband

was killed in his office at Fiduciary Trust on the 94th floor of the

South Tower, while Casazza, Kleinberg and van Auken are

Cantor-Fitzgerald widows. They began lobbying for answers early in

2002, navigating the labyrinth of American bureaucracy and hammering

the bureaucrats for direct answers to direct questions. In September

2002, Breitweiser testified at the first televised public hearing

before the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry (JICI) in DC.

Like many others, she wanted to know why, on May 16, 2002, National

Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice stated that she didn't "think

anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane

and slam it into the World Trade Center... That they would try to use

an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile."

Breitweiser knows the historical facts say otherwise. She noted the

following points in her statement. In her words:

o In 1993, a $150,000 study was commissioned by the Pentagon to

investigate the possibility of an airplane being used to bomb national

landmarks. A draft document of this was circulated throughout the

Pentagon, the Justice Department and to the Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA).

o In 1994, a disgruntled Fed Ex employee invaded the cockpit of a

DC-10 with plans to crash it into a company building in Memphis. That

same year, a lone pilot crashed a small plane into a tree on the White

House grounds, and an Air France flight was hijacked by members of the

Armed Islamic Group with the intent to crash the plane into the Eiffel

Tower.

o In January 1995, Philippine authorities investigating Abdul Murad,

an Islamic terrorist, unearthed a plot to blow up 11 airliners over

the Pacific, and in the alternative, several planes were to be

hijacked and flown into civilian targets in the U.S. Among the targets

mentioned were CIA headquarters, the World Trade Center, the Sears

Tower and the White House.

o In September 1999, a report, "The Sociology and Psychology of

Terrorism," was prepared for U.S. intelligence by the Federal Research

Division, an arm of the Library of Congress. It stated, "Suicide

bombers belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land

an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and Semtex) into the

Pentagon, the headquarters of the CIA, or the White House."

Like many others, Breitweiser believes that American intelligence had

long speculated that terrorist organizations could and would utilize

airplanes as weapons.

She also included a March 11, 2002 statement by the director of the

CIA, George Tenet: "[The United States] never had the texture-meaning

enough information-to stop what happened." She offered a similar

statement by the director of the FBI, Robert Mueller, from May 8,

2002: "[T]here was nothing the agency could have done to anticipate

and prevent the attacks."

Once again Breitweiser argued that the facts indicated otherwise. As

she said:

o Throughout the spring and early summer of 2001, intelligence

agencies flooded the government with warnings of possible terrorist

attacks against American targets, including commercial aircraft, by al

Qaeda and other groups. The warnings were vague but sufficiently

alarming to prompt the FAA to issue four information circulars, or

ICs, to the commercial airline industry between June 22 and July 31,

warning of possible terrorism.

o On June 22, the military's Central and European Commands imposed

"Force Protection Condition Delta," the highest anti-terrorist alert.

o On June 28, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice said, "It is

highly likely that a significant al Qaeda attack is in the near

future, within several weeks."

o As of July 31, the FAA urged U.S. airlines to maintain a "high

degree of alertness."

o One FAA circular from late July noted, according to Condoleezza

Rice, that there was "no specific target, no credible info of attack

to U.S. civil aviation interests, but terror groups are known to be

planning and training for hijackings, and we ask you therefore to use

caution." Two counter-terrorism officials described the alerts of the

early and mid-summer 2001 as "the most urgent in decades."

Breitweiser is resolute in her assertions. Airport security officials,

she believes, could have done much more to prevent the hijackings.

Beyond that, however, she wonders what September 11 would have been

like had the government made the public aware of the threats. How many

people, she asks, would have chosen to board planes that morning? And

how many of those in World Trade Center 2 would have remained in their

offices, watching the inferno of Tower 1, had they known of the

possibility of an air attack?

One of the more compelling passages in Breitweiser's statement

concerns a July 5, 2001 White House gathering of the FAA, the Coast

Guard, the FBI, Secret Service and INS wherein a top counter-terrorism

official, Richard Clarke, stated that "[s]omething really spectacular

is going to happen here, and it's going to happen soon." Despite being

put on heightened alert, intelligence agencies ignored-or at least

dismissed-what is now widely known as the "Phoenix Memo."

On July 10, an FBI field agent in Phoenix, AZ, named Kenneth Williams

reported suspicions of a hijacking plot. He recommended that the FBI

investigate the possibility that al Qaeda operatives were training at

U.S. flight schools, suggesting that Osama bin Laden's followers may

have been securing jobs as security guards, pilots and other

personnel.

Too many questions remain, and Breitweiser is very thorough in

outlining the possible failures of not only our government's

communication prior to the attack, but its response. She wonders why,

for instance, the NY/NJ Port Authority didn't evacuate the World Trade

Center when they knew that a second plane was heading in? And why

weren't the F-16s and Stealth bombers that tracked on radar screens at

approximately 8:05 a.m. used to prevent tragedy?

Concerning the attack on the Pentagon, Breitweiser notes that

Washington Air Traffic Control Center was aware of the first plane

before it hit the World Trade Center. And yet, the third

plane-American Airlines Flight 77, soon to plunge into the

Pentagon-made a few "loop de loops" over DC one hour and 45 minutes

after Washington Center was made aware of the hijackings. Why, she

asks, was our Air Force so late in its response?

In late 2002, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the

United States-now known popularly as the "9/11 Commission"-was

reluctantly created, in large part due to the efforts of the widow

Breitweiser. The commission's object is not so much to get the facts

straight, but to assign blame for "shortcomings" and "failures" in the

bureaucracy. It's what is known in intelligence circles as a "limited

hang-out."

On September 12, 2003, the widow Ellen Mariani filed a civil RICO suit

in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania naming

George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, John Ashcroft, Donald Rumsfeld, George

Tenet, Norman Mineta, Peter G. Peterson, Condoleezza Rice, George H.W.

Bush and Kenneth Feinberg, in addition to "Other unnamed past,

present, officials, representatives, agents, and private consultants

of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" as defendants. She is demanding a

jury trial.

She also fired off an open letter to President Bush in which she

claims that he "intentionally allowed 9/11 to happen to gather public

support for a `war on terrorism.'" She accuses him of being "fully

aware of the unfolding events" yet "[choosing] to continue on to the

Emma E. Booker Elementary School to proceed with a scheduled event and

`photo op.'" With America under attack, she writes, our president "did

not appear to blink an eye or shed a tear [but] continued on as if

everything was `business as usual.'"

Speaking for the families of the victims, she poses the following

questions to President Bush:

Why were 29 pages of the 9/11 committee report personally censored at

your request?

Where are the "black boxes" from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

Where are the "voice recorders" from Flight 11 and Flight 175?

Why can't we gain access to the complete air traffic control records

for Flight 11 and Flight 175?

Where are the airport surveillance tapes that show the passengers

boarding the doomed flights?

When will complete passenger lists for all of the flights be released?

Why did your brother, Jeb Bush, the governor of Florida, personally go

to the offices of the Hoffman Aviation School and order that flight

records and files be removed? These files were then put on a C130

government cargo plane and flown out of the country. Where were they

taken and who ordered it done?

Her letter ends ominously: "I will prove this in a court of law!"

So many, many questions. Why did World Trade Center 7 collapse? No

airplane hit that building, and before September 11, no steel

skyscraper had ever collapsed because of a fire. Yet three fell-very

neatly and virtually into their own footprints.

(Even if one allows the engineers their claims that WTC1 and WTC2 were

designed to collapse in on themselves, what of the perfect collapse of

WTC7?)

The firefighters who were in the two towers were not in the least

concerned about a collapse, as demonstrated in the fire department's

transcript of their radio traffic. In fact, they stated that the fires

were dying out and could be extinguished with just a couple of lines

of hose. Jet fuel burns like kerosene or charcoal fluid-quickly and

completely-yet Ground Zero burned for 100 days.

The idea of rigging the buildings for a controlled demolition was

dismissed as unrealistic by even the most suspicious types. How to

gain access? Well, President Bush's other brother, Marvin, had a

security company covering the World Trade Center, Dulles International

Airport and United Airlines.

In The American Reporter (Jan. 20, 2003), Margie Burns raises the

question of Marvin Bush's role in September 11. She notes that two of

the planes involved that day were United, and another took off from

Dulles airport. The firm that handled security, formerly named

Securacom, "listed [Marvin] Bush on its board of directors and as a

significant shareholder. The firm, now named Stratesec, Inc., is

located in Sterling, Va., a suburb of Washington, D.C., and emphasizes

federal clients."

The company, Burns writes, was never investigated. Rather, it has

benefited from increased security measures instituted in the wake of

the attacks.

Some doubt altogether that a plane hit the Pentagon. On Sept. 12,

Arlington County Fire Chief Ed Plaugher made some revealing

statements. When asked about aircraft wreckage, he responded that

"there are some small pieces of aircraft visible from the interior

during this fire-fighting operation...but not large sections. In other

words, there's no fuselage sections and that sort of thing." When

asked about jet fuel, he referred to a "puddle."

Look at pictures, however, and it's hard to believe that a Boeing 757

flew into the Pentagon. The damage is not in proportion to the claim,

especially when one considers that two Boeing 757s are said to have

taken down three skyscrapers. The Pentagon was dented, the plane

evaporated.

Nothing that has been reported as truth escapes examination. Even the

19 men at the controls, now infamously known as the 9/11 hijackers,

cannot be tied with real evidence to the event itself. This, according

to FBI Director Robert Mueller. "Mohammed Atta" appears to have been a

stolen identity, as per the real Atta's father and his passport, which

went missing in 1999, and on Sept. 23, 2001, the BBC reported that at

least four other of the 19 men identified as the hijackers were alive

and well-and considerably unsettled.

Why would seismographs in the NYC area register two tiny quakes at

Ground Zero at the commencement of the collapse of each tower?

Why were the planes up in the air for so long? And why did they fly

over so many military bases? Was America's defense team on a crack

break, or was it a National Reconnaissance Office exercise, a wargame

that involved hijacked aircraft being splashed into buildings in New

York and DC? The two that took the towers flew within spitting

distance of the Indian Point nuclear reactor facility.

Condoleezza Rice's preposterous May 16, 2002, statement that no one

could have foreseen this scenario was particularly ironic given that

Pacifica Radio identified her that day as the source of San Francisco

Mayor Willie Brown's "airport security" call warning him not to fly on

Black Tuesday.

The internet is boiling with analyses of the 9/11 event. In Europe, a

fair number of people believe the American government was complicit in

the attacks. According to recent polls, one-third of young Germans

believe this. Print and broadcast media here ignore the questions, but

it can't be kept from public view forever. It's all out there. It's

been two years, and we still have nothing but questions and Grassy

Knoll theories. The answers lay scattered in shreds and pieces,

waiting to be assembled.

Now come the widows, asking the right questions. Mariani's lawyer,

Phil Berg, makes a point to remind people that he is not in the least

bit suicidal, or given to playing with loaded guns. They may not be

able to reassemble or reanimate their loved ones in a literal sense,

but these families who are choosing the hard road, the Narrow Way,

will get to the truth.

©2004 All rights reserved.



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list