On the sites before I wanted to present to you the circumstances around 9/11. Now it is time, to try a role allocation. Who knew about this inside job? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em_XyTeNA1g ( 9/11 Coincidences ( Part Six ))
Introducing remark: The issues are so complicated, that it is not possible to explain them with a few words. The Conclusio 9/11 is a result of reviewing the complete circumstances. The reader will only be able to form his own opinion once he has internalized all the facts. I needed thousands of hours for this, because to understand what happened is one thing, to communicate is the other thing. But I have I have succeeded in doing it quite well. It was comparable with a puzzle.
In the morning of 9/11 the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) was on the second day of military exercises, scheduled for one week and called „Northern Vigilance“ and „Vigilance Guardian“. Part of one exercise was the simulation of a terror attack, in which the hijacking of airplanes used by terrorists for flying against buildings was simulated. Also in the two years before the 9/11 terrorattacks, NORAD had trained such exercises, in which aircrafts had been used in simulation for terror attacks and even the World Trade Center had been part of the exercise. Shortly before 9/11 Vice President Dick Cheney asked for the permission to take over the control of NORAD. Up to this time the authority for the shoot down procedure was in the responsibility of the generals. This changed on 06/01/2001. "Dick Cheney ordered Donald Rumsfeld to allow him to take control of NORAD itself and the shoot-down-procedure". Quelle: 9/11 Coincidences ( Part Six ) As a proof for this transfer of responsibility onto Cheney there exists a written memorandum.
First I want to remember once more the timing of the UA93 crash nearby Shanksville and the timing of the first impact in WTC1.
Shanksville: 10:03 WTC1: 08.46 Let´s calculate the difference: 77 minutes. This is really a long time and nobody seems to have been responsible for the shoot down procedure! The telephone call between Bush and Cheney took place at 10:18 to confirm the rules of the interceptors. But at that time the UA93 (Shanksville) had allegedly already crashed. Because 10:03 was the official time of the crash.
Statement Nr.1 of Cheney: At the 9/11 commission Cheney stated, that he immediately called President Bush after he had reached the conference room at 10:00, and arranged the rules for the interceptors. Cheney had proposed, to give the permission to the fighters to shoot down every plane whose pilot was refusing to veer. (Vincent Bugliosi S. 202 , Anklage wegen Mordes gegen Georg W. Bush)
Counter-Statement Nr.1 against Cheney: Contrary to Cheney´s statement exists a statement of the Chief of Staff Scooter Libby, who gave the statement to protocol, that he did not see Cheney make such a telephone call. (V.B. S.203)
Counter- Statement Nr.2 against Cheney: Mrs Cheney, who was also present, did not see Cheney make this phone call either. (V.B. S.203)
Counter-Statement Nr.3 against Cheney: The Deputy Chief of Staff in the White House, Joshua Bolton stated at the 9/11 commission, that he had proposed to the Vice-President to take contact with the President and to confirm the order for the shoot-down-procedure. The telephone call took place at 10:18. This is protocolled. He did not hear, that Cheney had already talked about the problem earlier.
Anti Statement Nr. 4 against Cheney: Ari Fleischer, the spokesman of the White House, did not have an earlier telephone call between Bush and Cheney in his protocol. Fleischer was informed about the authorization of the shoot-down-procedure at 10:20. (Vincent Bugliosi S.203)
We must ask ourselves, if the United States of America were governed by Georg W. Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney was indeed the shaddow man behind Bush. He was the real head of the Government and Bush only his puppet. Propably Vincent Bugliosi did not realize, that the permission for the shoot down procedure had transfered on 06/01/2001 from the generals to Dick Cheney. So Cheney had indeed on 9/11 all authority to give the order to intercept supposedly hijacked airplanes. But he did not. He made a telephone call with the President at 10:18. Bugliosi would not write....„Cheney knew, that such a permission for the shoot down can only be given by the President of the United States“, (S.202. V.B.) If Bugliosi had known that there existed already a memorandum, giving all the authorities to Cheney he would not write this. Propably he did not know that. Cheney wanted to gain more time. He wanted to garantee that the planers of 9/11 could finish their inside job. He wanted to ensure that the legend of the fourth airplane UA93 was on the ground before he took the handset to call the president. There is a logic behind this. The goal was to gain more time. Also the route deviation for the shoot down procedure on 06/01/2001 was a part of the plan.
For me it is the most astonishing and the most perfidious, that the protocolled telephone call between Bush and Cheney took place 15 minutes after the crash of the last of the 4 hijacked aircrafts and 92 minutes after the first attack onto the WTC. ( 08:46 to 10:18 = 92 minutes ) For how stupid did this government think we are?
F16A Abfangjäger: Who was responsible for the shoot-down- procedure ? Bush, Cheney oder Rumsfeld ? Cheney und Rumsfeld tragen die Hauptverantwortung für 9/11. War Bush dann nur eine dumme Marionette ?
And now it has to get stated, that some people in the control centers had played a role of the government. To this point fits the fact, that the Cleveland tower (at about 09:30) and the Airport of Johnstown (between 09:40 and 10:00) got evacuated, propably to give other dirty guys of the secret service the possibility to take place on their seats, working for the government and not interested in the truth. In any case too many testimonies were not accepted because they could tell what they really saw on their radarsereens. Because from 08:46 to 10:03 was enough time to demand the interceptors. There are many signs pointing to Cleveland as the airport where flight UA93 made an emergency landing at 10:45 and therefore it was necessary to evacuate the Cleveland Airport completely. In chapter UA93 I calculated the timetable with the help of an experienced pilot of a Boeing 757 and it seems to confirm this theory which was also stated already by LOOSE CHANGE: That UA93 did not crash nearby Shanksville. It propably landed in Cleveland and the passengers were evacuated into the NASA Research Center. A Secret Service special flight!
There was so much time to activate the interceptors but nothing happened. Imagine: If on all of the 16 Air Force Bases in the North East Sector of the United States only one of the F16 fighters is available, it is able to reach evey commercial hijacked jet within 6 to 10 minutes with a speed of 2400 km/h. (This is a statement of flight controller Robin Hordon, who cannot understand, why the interceptors had not got activated.) But I reapeat once more: On this day most of the interceptors had not been available because they were involved in exercises like „Nothern Vigilance“ and „Vigilance Guardian“. And I am convinced that all this was arranged long before because it was part of the plan of 9/11.The slow procedure garantueed that the responisibity had gone over to Cheney.And the „slow-slow proceedure“ garanteed to gain much more time, because Cheney decided to call Bush what was not necessary. Do You see the trick?
But the 9/11 Commission Report is reporting, that the Air Defense was activated too late by the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) which is not a military but a civil organisation. „Air Defense has been notified late by the civil aviation (FAA)" We see: The 9/11 Commission Report is blaming the civil organisation FAA. In my humble opinion these old guys who wrote the 9/11 Commission Report and for sure were working for the government are disqualified, because they heard for example William Rodriguez, reporting of explosions at WTC, but did not mention him in the 9/11 Commission Report. Not only William Rodiguez but also other people reported of a massive explosion before 08:46 in the B-level (=Sublevel) of WTC1. Explsiones took place also later in the whole buildings. The most interesting explosion happened in the B-Level before the impact of the plane in WTC1 at 08:46 and pushed Rodriguez upward. This means the explosion came from the sublevel. Can You explain me, why many other people who reported of explosions had never been heard by the 9/11 Commission. Shame on the government. Thinking a little bit around the corner, the MILITARY Air Defense should be guilty, because those who blame the others are in most of the cases those who want to get out of their responsibility. And also a child can imagine, that the Air Defense had failed, because the route deviation of the shoot down procedure via Cheney and Bush (slow form) needed too much time. That was the trick. The trick was to gain time...... The chain of responsibility on 9/11 was going like this:
1) Flight Controllers at the airports>>> 2) FAA (Federal Aviation Administration)>>> 3) NEADS(North East Air Defense Sector)>>> 4) NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command>>> 5) DOD (Department of Defense), RUMSFELD and his DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency)>>> 6) VICE PRESIDENT CHENEY>>> 7) PRESIDENT BUSH
You will see later, that I am dead right with my CONCLUSIO that they wanted an elongation of the chain of demand! See also the chapter Pentagon 9/11 and read the speech of William Rodriguez!
Robin Hordon is stating in the following: Until 06/01/2001 there had been two standard protocols:„Fast form of scrambling“ (order for shoot down procedure comes from the military authorities)„Slow form of scrambling“ (deviation over Vice President who contacted the President, the final call was not necessary.) After 06/01/2001 existed only the „slow form of scrambling“. "Rumsfeld, the Pentagon and the military changed the proceduresand instead of having two protocols...they went to one protocol ,the slow..! (Statement flight controller Hordon)
It seems, that the Pentagon wanted to reach a route deviation by changing the procedure into the „slow procedure“ for the date of 9/11, with the inclusion of the Vice-President and the President, of course with the ambition to gain more time to remain in inactivity. And everybody has to admit that the chain command worked really very slowly on that day. (08:46 WTC1 to 10:18 telephone call Bush Cheney = 92 minutes)
Also a very strange change in personal responsibilities is reported:
1) In the morning of 9/11 General W. Montague Winfield asked Captain ( Charles) Leidig to take over as Director of the Operations at NMCC (National Military Command Center).
2)One day after 9/11 Brigadier General and Director of Operations at the NMCC was upgraded to a „Major General“
3) In the morning of 9/11 Captain Charles Leidig took over for an interim time the tasks of the "Director of the Operations at NMCC". He got upgraded to „Rear Admiral, Direktor of the Operations sixth Fleet, Naval Force for Europe".
4)Brigardier General David F.Wherley jr. was on 9/11 Commander of Andrews Air Force Base. This is the Air Force Basi lying the closest to the Pentagon. He was upgraded to Major General, commanding General National Guard, District of Columbia.
5) Richard B. Myers, Vice Chairman of Joint Chief of Staff was on 9/11 for an interim time on the top of „all the military forces of the Nation, as the Chairman Shelton was out of the County“.
If You did read the chapters Pentagon 9/11 and WTC 9/11 attentive, the conclusion is now obvious:
Dick Cheney job on 9/11 was to prevent an active activation of the Air Defense System. It is interesting to note that during the exercises "Northern Vigilance" in which NORAD was involved, some interceptors were moved to Kanada and North America. This made the situation from the beginning on more complicated and this was only one reason why of the Air Defense was in such a disorder. And it is a fact that there was at least one more exercise taking place on 9/11: Vigilant Guardian.
Norman Mineta, the Transportation Secretary stated during a hearing at the national 9/11 Commision about the behaviour of Dick Cheney, who had been in the White House in Washington: "During the time, when the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and said to the Vice President "The plane is fifty miles out, the plane is thirty miles out and when he was going down to "the plane is ten miles out", the young man also said to the Vice President "Do the orders still stand?" And The Vice President turned and whipped his head around and said "Of course the order still stands!" Have You heard anything to the contrary. But at that time I did not know what that had meant“.
Conclusio: „He turned and whipped his head around"...With the statement „of course do the orders still stand“ , he pulled himself out of the affair. The order should have normaly been: „Bring the airplanes down." But Norman Mineta did not know how to interpret the situation.
There is another fact, which is substantiating the suspicion that Cheney was an insider of the terrorattack. An agent of Afghanistan informed the Egyptian Secret Service, that 20 members of Al Qaida had entered the United States and four of them had the intention to do a pilot training on Cesnas.
End of june 2001 the egyptian secret service gave the information to the CIA. But the CIA did not show any reaction onto the message. Even the Egyptian President Mubarak tried to contact the Vice President Dick Cheney, because Mubarak took the threat very seriously. But he had no success. (Source E. Laurant S.95/96)
But take care: The secret services catching the information could probably got tricked. Because to lay out wrong traces was always a way to fortify a legend. They launched some radio messages of telephone calls with key words that ensured them to get cought by the technical secret service NSA (this works automaticly) and the loyal agents of the NSA run them forward to their chiefs. They run the message forward to the CIA until they lie in a written form on the desk of the Georg Tenet. And Tenet briefed the President about the content of the threats. (Compare terror attack Discothek LaBelle in Berlin, Gaddafi was blamed for it, but the former german minister Andreas von Bülow is stating in his book that the Mossad stood behind this terror attack. An electronic radio-reflex device was simulating radio messages, which were thought to come directly from the lybian embassy. They should confirm the involvement of Gaddafi, what it was not true).
Do You realize the sense? After 9/11, after all these threats, nobody should come onto the idea that it could have been a terrorattack of a handful insiders of the Government itself. But it is a error to believe, that the whole CIA could be involved in it. The masterminds have to be searched within the rows of the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency), around Rumsfeld and Cheney. The separation between the loyal forces (in terms of law) and the criminal forces is the reason, why specific parts of the CIA like Tenet hold the knife directly onto the chest of Rice and Georg W.Bush, to force the government to react, but the government did not show any reaction. Nobody should thwart the terrorattack.
Richard Cheney, seit 2001 Vizepräsident der Vereinigten Staaten. Seit dem 1.Juni 2001 hatte er die Kontrolle über NORAD. Damit liegt das Nichtreagieren der Luftverteidigung in seinem Verantwortungsbereich. Er ist eng verflochten mit der Rüstungsindustrie, denn er saß im Aufsichtsrat des Rüstungskonzerns Northrop.
Donald Rumsfeld turned out to be a prophet on 9/11: Rumsfeld was on 9/11 at 8 o´clock in the Pentagon to take breakfast. http://www.medienanalyse-international.de/rumsfeld.html ( Textquelle ) "I had said at an 8:00 o'clock breakfast that sometime in the next two, four, six, eight, ten, twelve months there would be an event that would occur in the world that would be sufficiently shocking that it would remind people again how important it is to have a strong healthy defense department ..."
And once more Rumsfeld turns out to be a prophet shortly before the attack of the Pentagon. This is a statement of Chairman Fox, who sat together with Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz at breakfast. „And let me tell You, I've been around the block a few times. There will be another event". He repeated it for emphasis: "There will be another event!" This means another event beside the WTC attack! Within minutes the prevision got true. Another airplane crashed into the Pentagon. http://web.archive.org/web/20020817051201/http://cox.house.gov/html/release.cfm?id=33 But if You did read the chapter Pentagon 9/11 accurately, you will know meanwhile, that it had not been a Boeing 757, but a telecontrolled flight object of a type of a Global Hawk. I highlighted the argumentation with enlightening pictures of proof. In addition I want to indicate onto the facts of the case, that not at any time there was any danger for the person Rumsfeld, whose office was at the opposite side of the Pentagon (300 feet away from the impact). Because the part of the Pentagon, that was hit by the rocket was enforced before in a measure of reconstruction. Important is the reaction of Rumsfeld according to Wolfowitz: "He looked out his window, then rushed out toward the smoke, running down the steps and outside where he could see pieces of metal strewn on the ground. Rumsfeld began helping with the rescue efforts until a security agent urged him to get out of the area. "I'm going inside," he said, and took up his post in the National Military Command Center, the Pentagon war room“.
In the following text the reader can recognize a hidden attack onto Rumsfeld by Wolfowitz:
Donald Rumsfeld war zum Zeitpunkt des 11. September Verteidigungsminister der Vereinigten Staaten und erweist sich als Prophet: "THERE WILL BE ANOTHER EVENT"! Er war Chef des militärischen Geheimdienstes der USA ( DIA ) . Rumsfeld und Cheney sind die Mastermind des 11.September 2001 !
( Quelle: US Department of Defense ) Q: ...where were you on September 11th? Were you at the Pentagon when -- Wolfowitz: I was in my office. We'd just had a breakfast with some congressmen in which one of the subjects had been missile defense. And we commented to them that based on what Rumsfeld and I had both seen and worked on the Ballistic Missile Threat Commission, that we were probably in for some nasty surprises over the next ten years. Q: Oh, my gosh. Wolfowitz: I can't remember, then there was the sort of question of what kind of nasty surprises? I don't remember exactly which ones we came up with. The point was more just that it's in the nature of surprise that you can't predict what it's going to be. Q: Do you remember then the impact of the plane into the Pentagon? Or had you first heard stories about New York? What was -- Wolfowitz: We were having a meeting in my office. Someone said a plane had hit the World Trade Center. Then we turned on the television and we started seeing the shots of the second plane hitting, and this is the way I remember it. It's a little fuzzy. Q: Right. Wolfowitz: There didn't seem to be much to do about it immediately and we went on with whatever the meeting was. Then the whole building shook. I have to confess my first reaction was an earthquake. I didn't put the two things together in my mind. Rumsfeld did instantly. Q: Did he really? Wolfowitz: Yeah. He went charging out and down to the site where the plane had hit, which is what I would have done if I'd had my wits about me, which may or may not have been a smart thing to do. But it was, instead the next thing we heard was that there'd been a bomb and the building had to be evacuated. Everyone started streaming out of the building in a quite orderly way. Congregated on the parade ground basically right in front of the Pentagon which would have been about the worst place to have a crowd of a couple of thousand people in that moment if we'd again had our wits about us. But we were out of the building anyway".
Paul Wolfowitz, neokonservativer Vordenker, zum Zeitpunkt des 11. September stellvertretender Verteidigungsminister des Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika ! War lange Zeit Berater des Rüstungsunternehmens Northrop.
Conclusio: „He went charging out and down to the site wher/e the plane had hit, which is what I would have done if I'd had my wits about me, which may or may not have been a smart thing to do....“Behind this you can see a hidden verbal attack against Rumsfeld. Wolfowitz goes in his argumentation the other way round by elevating the reaction of Rumsfeld admitting that his reaction was reasonable, but on the other side constricting it by mentioning, that it „may not have been a smart thing to do“.Wolfowitz thought in the first moment, that it had been an earthquake, while Rumsfeld realized at once, that it had been a terrorattack. Very astonishing."There didn't seem to be much to do about it immediately and we went on with whatever the meeting was". After the attack on the WTC nobody seemed to be responsible to do something and they continued with the meeting. What for a curious behaviour for the Defense Secretary! Perhaps we can admit, that there had not been any need of action for Rumsfeld, because the responsibility for NORAD and in the consequences of the shoot down procedure had gone to Dick Cheney (see Memorandum). But questions remain. Appropriate to another version (this is the statement of a flight controller at the airport Boston) the standard procedure was reduced to „slow scrambling protocol“ on 06/01/2001 and this gives the responsibility to the Vice President for the demand of the fighters. Quite sure Rumsfeld had any responsibility for the defense of the Pentagon, because he was present on this day in the Pentagon. So he should had been more interested in what had happened at WTC.
Some sources are stating that at the Pentagon had been installed „Anti-Aircraft-Missile-Batteries“ in an emergency case already before. Some sources are stating that the missile batteries were installed after 9/11 what I believe meanwhile too. But for sure the air space is observed also on radar screens in the suburban rooms of the Pentagon. This means that one of the flight objects, that approached to the Pentagon must have been seen as a military airplane and so has to be seen as a friendly airplane for the Pentagon. I believe that another normal airplane which was seen unfriendly was also on the way to the Pentagon. Only this is an explanation why Transportation Secretary Norman Minety stated later:
"During the time, when the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man coming in and say to the Vice President ( who was in Washington on that day) "The plane is fifty miles out, the plane is thirty miles out and when he go down to "the plane ist ten miles out" , the young man also said to the Vice President "Does the order still stand?" And The Vice President turned and put his neck around and said "Of course the order is still stand !" Have You heard anything to the contrary. But at that time I did not know what that had meant“.
The flight object that hit the building, what I suppose was a Global Hawk, was for sure not for a long time in the air and if it was a Global Hawk, it had propably no transponder. They flight object Norman Mineta was talking about was the airplane that approached to the Pentagon for a longer time and was anyway visible on any screens in Washington. If not visible for the agents sitting in the cellars of the Pentagon, for sure for those who got the information in the White House in Washington and finally informed Norman Mineta. Because otherwise they would not have talked about it. Once more: Two flight objects: One flight object approaching to the Pentagon came from a longer distance and could get tracked on the screens. Transponder switched „on“ or „off“ what I do not know but anyway at least visible by primary radar. (AA77) And the other one, the drone, startet in the last moment when AA77 was nearby the Pentagon from the Ronald Reagan Airport to its deadly mission, screwed down in a 270° of 330° circle and hit finally the Pentagon. The Ronald Reagan Airport is indeed only a riprap away from the Pentagon and the circle could fit.
So the other one, the official AA77 has to be landed anywhere, perhaps on the Ronald Reagon Airport where the drone had started what makes sense. The exchange of the aircrafts was always an argument.
If we see the pictures of the surveillance cameras and realize that it approached the Pentagon in a low altitude manner on the last meters, the statement of testimonies who were talking about it make sense. („Cruise Missile with wings“) Because if what they saw and what is underlined by the camera was not a commercial airplane, it must have been something else and the position of the airport compared to the hitting point makes a 270° or 330° circle explainable.
So once more: The second flight object, that really hit the Pentagon, was propably a Global Hawk, starting from the Ronald Reagan Airport, because only a flight object of that sort is able to screw down in a 270° circle or 330° circle what people told. If the activities of the narrow 270° or 330° circle were also realized on the screens of the Pentagon, the controllers in the cellars of the Pentagon must have got convinced, that it could only be a military flightobject. If it would have been a Boeing 757, whose hijackers had switched off the transponder or did not talk to the controllers, then it would have been identified as an aggressive flight object and they would have informed Rumsfeld. But also he ramained in inactivaty. It is possible, that the controllers in the cellars of the Pentagon got the advice directly from Rumsfeld not to react or not to tell after 9/11 what they had seen on the screens. But not to talk about their job is in any case something what is expected of the co-workers in the Pentagon.
But also possible is, that the flight object that hit the Pentagon was equiped with a military transponder for camouflage and was therefore seen as a friendly aircraft. But I do not believe that. It was just a missile.
The IFF-Transponder (= identification friend or foe) is only installed in military airplanes. To avoid misunderstandings: I am talking about the flight object that really hit the Pentagon and not about the flight AA77 that started from Washington!
Compare: „Transportation Statistics" says, that flight AA77 was not scheduled on 9/11( "they were not sceduled to fly on september 11" ) http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-7859909765349743827
FAA ( Federal Aviation Administraion ) says, that AA77 is listed as „destroyed“ ( Quelle Loose Change Videoposition 1:07:03 )http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-7859909765349743827 You see, that it is so contradictorily. Why?
Because something is wrong in the whole official story. At least it has to get confirmed if the aircraft with the flight number AA77 is destroyed of not? The flight number AA77 will always change after every flight. But the identification code number of an airplane can never disappear. So after 9/11 the flight number AA77 changed into any other number if it exists further, but the identification number remains always the same. I think the plane still exists. It started in from the Internation Airport in Washington and turned after the supposed hijacking at 08:54 back to Washington. But it was not hijacked. I believe the pilots were also working for the government like Mr. and Mrs. Olsen do. It as an airplane with a special mission.
Conclusio: It was not at all a terrorist called Hanjour flying the American Airlines AA77 into the Pentagon, because the real Boeing 757 had to be seen already because of the missing civil transponder code respectively by the swittching off of the transponder or the because of refusal of the pilots to talk with the controllers as an unfriendls airplane. They did not want to bring it down because the real pilots had a special mission. It had to land in Washington at any airport and had to disappear forever.
Explanation about transponder codes: A switched-off transponder means only a non working secondary radar, but the primary radar is always available. So the official story is nonsense. They have methods to make an airplane visible as any point on the screens. To argue, that they did not know where the airplane was, sounds in my ears ridiculous and this confirmed also a pilot I know personally. Between 08:46 and 09:38 remained 52 minutes. A long time to activate the aerial defense. Don´t You think so? As soon as a pilot of a civil aircraft refuses to talk with the controllers on the ground, the aircraft has to get immediately intercepted! All that hesitation had system.
It is sure, that a transponder which got switched off by terrorists does not mean automaticly that the airplane is unvisible, „because this would lead the stealth-technology as well as the military radarsystems ad absurdum. Objects of a special size, in special heights are reflecting radarsignaturs, which can get recognized, independent of an active or inactive transponder“. http://www.debattierclub.net/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=4306 And compare the statement of Norman Mineta. Any controllers realized the exact distance of the aircardt to Washington.
It seems to me, that the trick was, to make the confusion as great as possible. From outside it should seem, as if nobody had the responsibility or everybody had slept. The Pentagon of course is protected from questions coming from outside. Nobody will ever tell us what they had really seen on the screens.
Aggregation: The memorandum communicates the responsibility on 06/01/2001 to Cheney according to a slow-scrambling-protocol until 9/11. The 9/11 Commission Report assigns the responsibility for the shoot down procedure also to Cheney in Washington, because he had confirmed the rules of engagement in a telephone call at 10:18 with President Bush. After 9/11 „slow and fast scrambling protocol“ got activated again. But Cheneys reactions at 10:18 was much too late, because the last of the four airplanes had allegedly crashed at 10:03 nearby Shanksville. Do You see, that they wanted to have a story of four crashed airplanes? I believe indeed, that the telephone call between Cheney and Bush took place at 10:18, but I do not believe, that the rules of engagement have to be confirmed by the President in such an emergency case. This was a consequence of switching the „slow and fast scrambling protocol“ into the „slow protocol“. There must exist a standardized procedure giving the military and in the last consequence the pilot the final responsibility for the shoot down procedure. Normally!!!! The memorandum was necessary to succeed a deviation in the chain of command!
Let us see what Rumsfeld did in the Pentagon on 9/11. It is really curious, that at 09:30 of 9/11 ..." the supreme commander states an attack on the U.S.A., the Pentagon stays quiet, Rumsfeld goes on with educating Senator Cox, and the Secretary of Defense Wolfowitz judged: "There didn't seem to be much to do about it immediately." As if interceptors were never deployed, existing or invented. As if air-policing was an unfamiliar word for the DOD and not being a NATO SOP ( standard operational procedure ). Compare once more: At 08:46 was the first attack on WTC1
"Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was in his office inside the Pentagon when the blast happened with no warning. Rumsfeld rushed to the area of the blast and for 15 minutes helped load the wounded onto stretchers. He then retreated to the National Military Command Center where senior military leaders pondered the question: What now."
He helped to load the wounded onto stretchers. This sentence shows his bad conscious, because it was not a prediction he had stated short before the attack onto the Pentagon, he knew exactly, that an attack of a special form was imminent. Wherefrom he should have known, that not another attack onto the Pentagon had to be expected, comparable to the second attack onto the World Trade Center? He knew that exactly. That event, he had waited for, was over, at least for the Pentagon.
Ein Label, heißt übersetzt "the database" und ist ein Begriff, der von der CIA geschaffen wurde."It was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with" ( the help of the CIA ) Und Bin Laden war zu jener Zeit der Liebling der CIA, denn man unterstützte ihn im Kampf gegen die Sowjets.
Präsident Bush: Bush is ( like already mentioned ) in a primary school in Sarasota, Florida and pupils are going to read to him tales in a classroom. Once more at this point the timetable of events:
08:46: Attack North Tower WTC1
08:55: The security adviser Condoleeza Rice informs the President in a telephone call, that an airplane had hit the building WTC1. ( Source: Vincent Bugliosi, S.197, Anklage wegen Mordes gegen Georg W. Bush)
09:03:Attack South Tower WTC2
09:04: Bush is starting his visit at the school in Sarasota, Florida.
09:07: His chief of staff Andrew Card enters the classroom and whispers him into his ear the information, that a second aircraft had hit WTC2.
09:12: Bush is leaving the classroom ( Source: Vincent Bugliosi, S.197, Anklage wegen Mordes gegen Georg W. Bush)Other sources are stating 09:15 as the time that Bush is leaving the classroom.
09:43: Pentagon attack
Before, at 09:30, Bush gives a press conference. This is an excerpt of the press conference: Two airplanes have crashed into the World Trade Center in an apparent terrorist attack on our country. I have spoken to the Vice President, to the Governor of New York, to the Director of the FBI, and have ordered that the full resources of the federal government go to help the victims and their families, and to conduct a full-scale investigation to hunt down and to find those folks who committed this act. Terrorism against our nation will not stand. And now if you would join me in a moment of silence. May God bless the victims, their families, and America. Thank you very much".
Do You realize something? The religion is going to get abused, to gain time. A president, who finds in this situation time, to remain in a moment of silence. Incredible! If You did not realize it until now, You are a stupid. The hesitation of the President, to take the initiative in front of the cameras had as well as the postponed activity in the classroom the reason to give him an alibi. It was a conscious timeout of politics.
Georg W. Bush, am 11. September 2001 war für ihn das perfekte Alibi organisiert !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0oW2SamZYY&feature=related Quelle embedded video NWO Part 2 of 20 In a section of the video, published on Youtube, taken 3 months after 9/11, President Bush said: (I have to translate it now free, because the video got deleted) „I was sitting outside of the classroom, prepared to go in and I saw an airplane, which hit the building, You know, the television was abviously switched on, I was accustomed to fly by myself and I thought, what a terrible pilot, and I said, that it must have been a terrible accident“.
In this video as well as in the book of Andreas von Retyi is mentioned a contradiction: Retyi: „Occording to Bush´s statement, obviously a TV set had been switched on in the vestibule of the classroom. But even if there had been a TV set, Bush never could have seen those pictures of the attack. Because on 9/11 no pictures of the first impact could not have been broadcasted. They had been available not until the day after 9/11. Bush must have got these pictures on another way if it had been really the pictures and not the telephone call the got from Rice like Bugliosi stated. The chances are that he had got the pictures in his perfectly equipped limousine. In no case they could have come from the public medias. Whatever the source was, it must have been already available to film the first attack, before anyone could imagine, that this could happen. We call this definitely pre-cog“. (Source freely translated of „Die Terrorflüge, Andreas von Retyi, Kopp Verlag)
Assumed that Bush had a gap in his memory, when he hold this speech. It is well known, that Bush from time to time gets things mixed up. We can conclude this out of an interview with the former chief of staff in the White House Andrew Card. Because from the point of view of Andrew Card it took place like this:
SPIEGEL interview with Andrew Card S. 138 ( „Mut zur Einsamkeit) „When we were standing beside the director of the school and waited, that the door of the classroom opened, came a co-worker of the National Security Council to us and said: „Mr. President, it seems that a small two engine aircraft had hit the World Trade Center. My first thought was: „What a terrible accident“.“
When the president had begun with the reading lesson, the chief of staff was outside the classroom, where the President had begun to let him reading tales by children.
Andrew Card: „The co-worker of the national security Council came to me and said: „It was not a small propeller-driven aircraft, it was a commercial jet“. I though of the passengers and their agony, but until that point I did not thought of a terror attack. Already the co-worker came again and said: „A second jet has just hit the second tower“. My first thought was: The President has to get informed about that. My second thought was: How tell it to him? Meanwhile I was bringing my thoughts into the right order, I opened the door of the classroom, went next to the President, bended down to him and whispered him my both sentences: „A second plane has hit the second tower. America is under attack“.........I stepped aside and waited, perhaps 30 seconds, before I left the room once more. SPIEGEL interview with Andrew Card S. 138 ( „Mut zur Einsamkeit)
It is interesting for me that Andrew Card embezzles in this interview the fact, that Bush gives after leaving the classroom an interview at 09:30. But this is propably because he had to solve now a lot of logistic problems and did not realize what Bush did.
Andrew Card: „I had now a lot to do with logistic problems“. He had to contact the emergency room of the White House ( an information center for all kind of emergencies) He had to look after the Secret Service, to escort Bush to the airport. Card: „It was difficult, to locate all the people we needed“.
On the question, which had been the first official act of Bush after he had left the classroom, Andrew Card said to SPIEGEL: „After he had left the classroom Bush contacted a lot of people: First to the National Security Advicer Condoleeza Rice, then the Vice President Dick Cheney and at last Robert Mueller, who was since 10 days the new FBI-Director. We had been on the way to the runway, when the phone calls took place. It was more difficult, to reach the Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, because also the Pentagon had got an aim of an attacking aircraft and he had just left his office“.
Some of these telephone calls took place, when Bush was already on the way to the airport, where the Air Force One was standing by to bring him initially to the the Air Force Base in Louisiana. From there it went further to Offut Air Force Base in Nebraska, until he returned during the late afternoon to Washington.
In my opinion it was not a coincidence, that there had been so many frictions. Politicians do not have such a bad memory that they do not remember all those details of their actions and of their cognition, especially on such a memorable day like 9/11. In the case of Bush it must be have special reason for his memory loss. He mixed up what he really did know already before he had entered the classroom and what he was told to say by those who had written his screen-play of 9/11. To distinguish is indeed difficult for a mediocre politician like Bush. But perhaps it is also the strategy to confuse the public with an incredible amount of contradicitons.
I am sure that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice are part of the criminal team being responsible for 9/11, not only by displaying their ignorance and hesitation in the weeks before and during the day of 9/11. The ignorance and hesitation was the strategy to pioneer the basement for a terrorattack in order to maintain afterwards the believable legend of Al Qaida as the mastermind of 9/11. This all should prepare the ground for a war against terrorism, that should bring the United States the accelerated supremacy onto the strategic resources of the world, lying in the Near and Middle East.
I remember once more to the PNAC study = Project of a New American Century. This study is the basement for the 9/11. And by the way the study ends with a treasonable sentence: „....if there is not an accelerating event like Pearl Harbor“
The only person I do not suspect to be a part of this inside job is Paul Wolfowitz, although knowing that he was also a member of the thanktank fabricating the PNAC-study. Wolfowitz got after his retirement in february 2001 the president of the „World Bank“. I think it was not necessary to involve him as a Deputy Defense Secretary in this inside job. Only an elected group of persons were involved. Therefore his hidden attack on Rumsfeld in the interview You saw in my lines before.
Also Condoleeza Rice played her role in this dirty job. She was it in her function as National Security Adviser, who wiped off the threats of an imminent terror attack and she was it, who took care, that the CIA played after 9/11 the play of the government. This is not particular, because the CIA belongs as part of the executive to the government. But Rice was it, who feeded the public with a new edition of the secret NIE-report (National Intelligence Estimate), that turned the content of the obtained results of the CIA into a completely another direction. Meanwhile the CIA got convinced, that Saddam Hussein did not support Al-Qaida, exactly this was stated afterwards in the NIE report that was given to the public. Very clearly we have in our ears and in our mind the invocations of Saddan Husseins weapons of mass distrucion in form of chemical and biological weapons, threatening the western „domocracies“. She herself was it who painted pictures of mushroom clouds into the air, if the United States would not engage in Iraq pre-emptively. The base of this allegation was this report, that was presented to the public on 10/04/2002, but had nothing to do with the original secret NIE-report.
According to Vincent Bugliosi, Condoleeza Rice operated against the democratic senator Bob Graham and chairman of the Secret Service Committee who was shocked about the published NIE report. „The non secret version which we got from the CIA, did not contain, what I had demanded, they gave me a document, that was only propaganda, cry of war coming from deap throat without moderating informations...It is out of any discussion, Rice let Tenet know, that the government Bush wanted to have a report with a clear evaluation of the situation. ( Source: Vincent Bugliosi, Anklage wegen Mordes gegen Georg W. Bush, S.119)
Condoleeza Rice was at the time of 9/11 National Security Adviser and got later Minister of Foreign Affairs. Propably she would not get this promotion if she would not had been...... „you have to be a motherfucker, that the President showes you the joystick of power“.
Are You proud to live in a „democracy“ and therefore in the sureness, that everybody has the chance to get a better position because he or she had proved with lies? Go on dreaming of democracy, stupid! If Rice has fucked to the top in the original word of the meaning is not sure. But I think she did not.
In the book of Bob Woodward, (State of Denial, Leugnen der Wirklichkeit) is reported about the meeting in the White House between the chief of the Anti Terror Department Cofer Black and the CIA director Georg Tenet at Condoleeza Rice. At that time before 9/11 she was still National Security Adviser. This meeting took place on 06/10/01 and Condoleeza Rice got vividly warned of a terror attack straight ahead on the ground of the United States. „We did all except of firing off the weapon, that was pointing onto her head“, is citing Woodward the principal witness Cofer Black. CIA director Tenet wanted to shake her, but she wiped off the warnings from the table. (free translation from SPIEGEL)
Why did she not react onto the warnings of the loyal forces within the secret service? It had system!
Why did she answer onto a question at a hearing to 9/11, if she knew, that „a numerous young arabian men were absolving flight courses“ with the words: „I did not know that!“ ( V.B. S188) Because it had system to admit nothing.
Why did she answer onto the question, „Did they tell You, that the U.S.Marshal Program had changed in a way, that inbound-flights should not get no longer protected by sky marshalls“ with the words: „They did not tell it to me“ ( V.B. S.188) Because it had system to deny.
Why is she acting the fool, although her predecessor, the National Security Adviser Sandy Berger had adviced at his office-surrender to the problem Nr.1: „The terrorism in general and Al-Qaida in particular“ ( V.B. S.191) Because it had system to mime the fool!
All that had system!
And I wonder, why the german magazine „DER SPIEGEL“ wants to know, „that she did not had knowledge of the special secret service of the Pentagon, whose job it was to deliver pretenses for war preparings“ ( DER SPIEGEL 44/08, Seite 120)
All that had system! This fawning courtier was as dump as a post. The secret service, the SPIEGEL is talking about here, is a special secret service within the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency. And please never mix the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) with the DIA. The warnings, the CIA ran forward to the government could disburden the CIA so that we can suppose, that the CIA had not a dominant role in the inside preparations onto 9/11.
Condoleezza Rice zum Zeitpunkt des 11. September Sicherheitsberaterin des Präsidenten. Für den Autor Vincent Bugliosi war sie die "Hofschranze".
Und dann ist noch dieser Justizminister John Ashcroft, der am 10. September 2001 den Haushalt für sein Minsterium beantragte. "Er wollte die Finanzmittel für 68 Projekte des Justziministeriums erhöhen, aber kein einziges hatte direkt mit Terrismusabwehr zu tun. Schlimmer noch, er lehnte einen Antrag des FBI ab ,der 65 Millionen Dollar für 149 neue Beamte im Bereich Terrorismusabwehr beantragt hatte. Er schlug außerdem vor, die Mittel um 65 Millionen Dollar ( von 109 auf 44 Millionen ) zu kürzen, die den Bundesstaaten und Kommunalregierungen zum Ausbau ihrer Terrorismusabwehr bewilligt worden waren." ( Vincent Bugliosi S. 193 , Anklage wegen Mordes gegen Georg W. Bush )
And there is still this minister of justice John Ashcroft, who applied for the household of his ministery. „He wanted to increase the funds for 68 projects of the minstery of justice, but nothing of them had to do with terror defense. More worse, he rejected a petition of the FBI, requesting 65 million dollars for 149 new clerks in the division of terror defense. He also suggested, to reduce the funds from 109 to 44 millions ( 65 millions difference), that would have been granted the federal states and the minicipal governments for the extension of their terrorism defense“. ( Vincent Bugliosi S. 193 , Anklage wegen Mordes gegen Georg W. Bush )
Don´t You realize until now the system, that was created for the preparation, to pioneer the 9/11 attack? First to shut down the systems, that nothing and nobody can thwart the attacks, to be able to accelerate them later with high capacity? All only for camouflage.
In the heads of the above mentioned thinktank was developped the PNAC Study (Project for a New American Century), written down and signed in form of a document in september 2000. This agenda was supported from representatives of the Bush-Admistration and is carrying the name „Rebuiding Americas Defenses“. The aganda says, that it is the aim, to change the role of the Untited States into a dominant role for tomorrow. „It will be a long process , if there would not be a catastrophic and catalyzing event like Pearl Harbor“.
John Ashcroft Attorney General , Justizminister am 11. September 2001
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3JmXQ-z8S4&mode=related&search= Excerpt of Michael Meacher (Labour Party, british minister of environment from Mai 1997 to Juni 2003): „The project was controlled by Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and by Jeb Bush, the younger brother of the president and by Lewis Libby, Cheney´s former chief of staff. It is dealing with the control of the oil in the Middle East and it is announced, that America is targeting to reach the world predominance, military and economically, and the essential quintessence is going to cringe you: „If we are on the way to change America in a dominant world power, then it will be a long process, if there will not be a a catastrophic and catalyzing event like Pearl Harbor“.
This is no joke. This sentence exists really in the agenda! I believe that this catastrofic and catalyzing event took really place with 9/11. This agenda is the key for the solution of 9/11.
Conclusio: After all my research I got today convinced, that there was only one real commercial airplane with passengers on board that crashed. It was the airplane which crashed into the WTC1. But at the beginning of my research I thought, that indeed Mohammed Atta had hijacked the plane, like it got repeated again and again by the US government and by the sychronized mainstream-medias of the world. Then I assumed that there had been only one real hijacked airplane (WTC1, Mohammed Atta) and the other aircrafts had only been doubles, military jets or missiles (see chapter Pentagon WTC and flight UA93) Then I got convinced after endless hours of research, that the jet that hit the WTC1 was a real commercial aircraft and that the original pilots got tricked, because they lost the possibility to control their own airplane. Andreas von Bülow describes in his book „Die CIA und der 11. September“ very enlightening the possibility to get the control over an aircraft from outside. If You compare the pictures of the WTC2 attack (UA175), were you see that the plane was assemtric at the down-side and that it had a cavity under its fuselage, you get convinced that it had not been a commercial airplane. It was a radio-controlled military jet very similar to a commercial jet. If this radio controlled worked with a military jet at the south tower (WTC2) looking very similar to a Boeing 767, it could also have worked with the Boeing 767 at the north tower (WTC1). It is a fact, that about 600 jets of american airliners have got an equipment for an outside radio control. The european airlines have all dismantled this equipment after they were sold to Europe. Boeing is the producer of this equipment. You know that Boeing is the biggest military producer. Comprehensible, if they do not want to discuss about the video documenting the WTC2 crash. (If You do not believe me, see the videos on the front page on my homepage)
Let us think now only theoretically, that Mohammed Atta perhaps did not even was a passenger in the aircraft that hit WTC1, then he must have been either on flight AA77 (Pentagon) or UA93 (Shanksville). Shanksville´s UA93 (Boeing 757) made an emergency landing anywhere, perhaps in Cleveland and the passengers were evacuated into the NASA Research Center. Pentagon was hit by a rocket and a drone, the real commercial airplane called AA77 landed anywhere in Washington. WTC2 aircraft (UA175) was a dummy without passengers. It is really possible to create a legend turning all around the whole truth. He startet in Boston with AA11. But AA77 startet in Washington and UA93 started in Newark. I think this story must be true. He was really on board of AA11 coming from Boston. But what had happened to Atta and the other supposed highjackers if they really had been in AA11 (WTC1) and what happened to all the passengers sitting in flight AA11( WTC1). I want to mention at this point, that it had been only about 204 passengers in all four aircrafts. You have to admit, that 204 passengers also can fit in one Boeing 757 or Boeing 767. And now I anticipate a point I discussed already in chapter UA93. According to LOOSE CHANGE and fitting to my calculations with the support of an experienced Boeing 757 pilot, it could be possible that one Boeing 757, flight UA93 (that allegedly crashed nearby Shanksville), made an emergency landing at 10:45 in Cleveland. The passengers were all evacuated in the NASA Research Center and had been propably briefed. The newest argument is, that Mohammed Atta had been an agent working for the US-secret service believing to be a part of a military exercise. True or not true, I do not know. Could it also be possible that he had been in UA93? Which reason had been the bank draft from the pakistanian chief of the secret service. It seems to give an entanglement or the try to convince the public into an entanglement of the CIA director Tenet in 9/11, because Tenet visited the chief of the pakistanian secret service six days before 9/11. And then.... „The chief of the pakistanian secret service had made some days before 9/11 a bankdraft of 100000 Dollars to Florida over an intermediary of the terrormilieu, Ahmed Umar Sheik, a close friend of Osama Bin Laden“. (Source: Andreas von Bülow. S.74 (Die CIA und der 11. September) Did the money really went to Mohammed Atta like they want to tell us, perhaps as a wage for his participation at the exercise? Was Mohammed Atta believing to be a part of the exercise „Nothern Vigilance“ and „Vigilance Guardian“ and supposed to play a role as an agent of any secret service in these military exercises? 9/11 was really well prepared and we have to think about what all could be possible. It is a puzzle and this puzzle has to get completed.
I tend to think that Atta is dead and all the other about 204 passengers and crew members are dead. Because in the case of an inside job, every confidant would be a danger for the maintainance of the 9/11 lie, respectively for the secret service standing behind the 9/11 attack. (Special secret service within the DIA was from my point of view the mastermind!) So it is more logical to believe that Atta was indeed in AA11 ( WTC1), but not sitting in the cockpit. I am sure that the plane was controlled from outside because of the flash we see on the video taken by the Naudet brothers of the first attack is speaking volumes. All possibities have to get thought about.
But now we have to treat with another argument: A reporter of THE SUN, called Robert Stevens, who wanted to submit prooves, that Mohammed Atta from the flightschool in Lantana had not been the hijacker who was exhibited to the public by the medias, payed his courage with his life. (see Anthrax chapter on my homepage). So entitled doubts should be appropriate. Therefore we must look once more onto the attacks of the World Trade Centers. The appearence of the flashs, proceeding to the impact of AA11 ( WTC1) into the North Tower is argueing for a separate event. I suppose that this flash is an explosion coming from inside the building. This is logical, because we know, that there had been explosions also being responsible for the collapse of the building later. Different colors of the explosion clouds, squibs, cluster, explosions appearing like cascades from above to the bottom, statements of testimonies, William Rodriguez, fireworkers, talking about beating explosions, („BAMM,BAMM,BAMM“), explosions were responsible for the destruction of the windows in the Lobby and for the falling down of the marble plates in the lobby. How could that happen if an airplane hits the builing on the top? The petrol could not have been the reason, because not one elevator got from the bottom to the top. Take a look at chapter „WTC 9/11 please and read the speech of William Rodriguez if you are not convinced about the explosions. Source of the following pictures:
John Ellis "Jeb" Bush, war zum Zeitpunkt der Präsidentschaftswahlen Gouverneur von Florida und versprach in Anbetracht einer denkbar knappen Wahlentscheidung 2000, seinem Bruder "Florida zu liefern" ! ( Bildquelle sekundär: Wikipedia, Bildquelle primär: Agenicia Brasil, Fabio Pozzebom )
I change now the word „conspiracy theory“ into „conspriracy“. Those who alredy have read the preceding texts attentive, will be able to comprehend this. With a systematic I tried to put the cart before the horse. In the chapter „Pentagon“ I hope that I was able to make believable that it was a rocket of a Global Hawk or something like that, that hit the Pentagon. Then I concentrated onto WTC, beginning with the attack and not ending with the collapse of the buildings. Now we go once more back to the beginning of the mystery story with the following video. Also at this video my instinct says. Something is going wrong here. See on Your own: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbCcb6NV8Io Missile hits World Trade Center (Picture source)
Zum Nachdenken: WTC war mit einem Sicherheitssystem von STRATESEC ausgestattet, deren Direktor bis 2000 Marvin Bush war. Wirt D. Walker III. , ein Verwandter Bushs hatte bis 2002 einen hochrangigen Posten bei STRATESEC. ( Bildquelle: www.youtube.com "9/11 Coincidences ( Part Three )"
Propably the key for the clearing of 9/11 is hidden already in the sequences of this video. Who are these men, a policeman and a fireworker, the last mentioned seems to be bored of his work. Much more interesting is for me the question: Who is this person, who is standing behind the video camera and is filming at first sight such an uninteresting scenery? During the approach of the airplane the camera is swinging like self-evident in the direction of the airplane and finally into the direction of the North Tower until the airplane hits. To film something which is not important for the documentary respectiveley the work of the fireworker does not bother them , unless they did know what would happen afterwards. The video was taken by the french journalists Jules and Gideon Naudet, making a documentation about the fireworker of New York. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Naudet Was this video really taken acutally?
I have not the intention to blame neither the police officer nor the fireworker for something. Because it is out of my imagination that anybody of the policeman, a fireworker, any institution like CIA or DIA could have an interest to document a selfmade terror attack and to publish it in the following time. Or should I think once more about it? I am not sure! Additionaly a terror attack, where the people can see in a closer inspection a curious flash at the building, which can be evaluated as a separate event and leads to the conclusion that an explosion inside or outside of the building happend before the impact should make attentive. This flash is suspicious. If any secret service would be the instructing party for this video, they would direct the suspicion automatically onto the CIA, because they get always blamed for something what is going wrong within the United States. Because the CIA is the most famous secret service what are telling us also the letters in capital. C for „Central Intelligence Agency“. But I told You before, that the CIA had lost its former importance at the expense of the DIA. (See some chapters above)
In the comments to this video on www.youtube.com it is remarked critically, that it could also be a matter of light refections. I have my doubts. To my mind it could actually had been a real commercial airplane Boeing 767 ( AA11), because only under this circumstances the theory of four airplanes could sustain in the public for such a long time until now. If only ONE commercial airplane proves to be a fact, then the theories of the others 3 aircrafts could be sold better to the public. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbCcb6NV8Io Missile hits World Trade Center
Boeing 767, zivile Ausführung ( Bildquelle: www.youtube.com "Missile hits World Trade Center" )
South Tower: ( WTC2) , Second impact: In the second part of the video, which is domumenting the atttack onto the Southtower, for me is not only the special piece of equipment under the fuselage suspicious, but first and foremost the fact, that the whole bottom side has a cavity in the middle along the length of the airplane. If the special piece of equipment is a variant of the running gear, like a pilot is mentioning in the accompanying comments, it remains in any case very astonishing, that is unsymmetric. But which kind of aircraft has such a peculiar cavity? The cavity is on the video sequence visible until the moment of the impact. This means, that it is not intregrated afterwards with a manipulation of the picture. Besides I consider that it is less propably that someone of CNN makes the effort to integrate every single picture of the sequence, only to heat on conspiracy theories. On the contrary the flashes on the North Tower and the South Tower could get integrated easier because they are visible only on a few frames. Against it speaks the fact: First of all the fact, that before the impact in both buildings are many visible flashs documentated and also acustically detonations can be heard. For proof, you can find on Youtube statements of testimonies and acustic video proofs. Start Your own research! The controlled demolition is from my point of view standing out of any discussion. So an explosion also short before the impact of the plane makes sense. I will explain to You the sense later. Secondly this assumption is supported by the fact, that the plane, which hit the South Tower was filmed from four different positions of a video cameras. On four videos the flash is visible. I think it is much more complicated to fake three videos to let the flashs seem ongoing synchronic. It assumes that one person had manipulated all original videos taken from three different positions and by three different sources. I think this is not possible.
The non-explosion of the wings outside of the building of WTC2 (Südturm) and the flash before the impact makes it more propably that it was a converted Boeing that got used as a cruise missile. Boeing is experienced in producing weapons and Boeing represantatives are refusing to discuss the curious down-side of the plane, what is very suspicious. The inspection of the impact of the plane into the North Tower does not allow the conclusion, how the wings reacteded in the moment of the impact because the distance is too long to see that exactly. It is not possible to say if they exploded in the moment of the impact outside or inside of the building. But all videos ( WTC1+WTC2) want to show us, that there were going on flashs in the area of the tip of the nose before the impact. I do not know how wings full of petrol normally react in the moment of an impact. According to the official version both Boeings were started in Boston and on the way to Los Angeles. The distance for this flight is 4198 km. This is not a short distance fligth. We have to assume that the airplanes had the amount of about 24 tons of kerosine on board (including „alternate“). But it is clear, that an airplane does not fly without kerosine, also in the case that one or both airplanes had been missiles and I suppose that the kerosine is always in the wings. I believe the AA11 was a real commercial airplane with passengers on board and the UA175 was a missile without passengers. Was „the special piece of equipment“ the tank for the kerosine ( not believable) or was it the receiver for the radio transmitter and the operators were supposed to sit in WTC7, a building which curiously collapsed 7 hours after the collapse of the North Tower and the most curious is that the WTC7 collapsed without getting hit by an airplane? (Andreas von Bülow says CIA is responsible, I say DIA is responsible, both organisation had offices in the WTC7). And to boot WTC7 collapsed in a manner which is so typical for controlled demolition. Not many people are talking about WTC7, but this building is also very important and perhaps could deliver the best proof for an inside job. Every commercial airplane is flying along a conducting ray and perhaps the flash shortly before the impact was the explosion that should destroy all traces that could lead the inspectors to the conviction that the airplanes were conducted from outside. Therefore also the demolition of WTC7. To blur traces! Another explanation for the flashs before the impact of the planes are for me not seizable. If it was a picture manipulation on youtube, so why is the flash also visible on TV? The flash appeared without any doubt before the plane hits the building. Why should the government heat on conspiracy theories if it is their intention to avoid exactly this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbCcb6NV8Io Missile hits World Trade Center
Militärische Ausführung = " Missile" ( Bildquelle: Youtube: Missile hits World Trade Center )
Ungewöhnlicher Blitz am Südturm Bild 1
Curious Flash at the South Tower. Here You see also, that the flash appears, before the plane hits the building WTC1. This could be caused by the radio controlled or automatic destruction of the emitter hidden in the building. It was necessary to destroy the emitter to blur the traces. It is interesting, that anywhere on youtube exists a video of 9/11 and you see and hear a woman saying: "That was not a commercial airplane!"
The following text assumes, that You have read the preciding text carfully!
Think at this point simply and this is the try to get a solution: CIA is not alike CIA and DIA is not alike DIA. Did some loyal people within the secret services know what was going on there, did they know that some collegues planned this terror attack and could not react but decided to take a camera to do document it? It could be like this: The loyal forces within the secret service (DIA or CIA) had no possibility to take influence onto the criminal plan but decided to document it in a video with the intention to blame at any time in the future the Bush government for what they had done on 9/11. Like I explained already in another chapter of my homepage, loyal forces in the CIA (=Georg Tenet) tried to convince Condoleeza Rice in a urgently called meeting, that a terror attack was planed to get executed in the United States. „We ( the CIA) did everything except of firing off the weapon that was pointed onto her head“. But Condoleeza Rice wiped the warnings off the table“, ...because the catalyzing event to bring the United States the accelerated supremacy onto the strategic resources of the world, lying in the Near and Middle East should nobody cross. I remember once more to the PNAC study = Project of a New American Century. The loyal forces within the CIA, who had got wind of the planed terror attack of their own government, asked the european secret services for assistance. Don´t forget, that the camera team that filmed the first attack (and by the way also the second) was a french team of journatists. (Jules and Gideon Naudet, DGSA, french secret service perhaps). I explained already at another chapter of my homepage the correlation between media representatives and secret services. (chapter Medien) However I want to raise concerns over something else: The Naudet brothers, from them is the video deriving, threated proceedings to the LOOSE CHANGE film makers in the case that they use the filmmaterial for their own movie. Therefore the question is allowed, if these Naudet brothers are really clean. I have my doubts. If somebody is willing to engage himself in the enlightenment of one of the most terrible terror attacks of the past century, he would never put forward finiancial interest, he would always try to contribute his part to the enlightenment. I believe that the Naudet brothers were actively working for the US Secret service and the insiders of 9/11 and their video could be also the solution for 9/11. It was not an accident that they filmed the approaching of the two airplanes ( WTC1+WTC2). It could had been this video that Bush already had seen in his limousine on the way to the school in Sarasota Florida. He did not see it on the tv-screen, because this video was not available for the public on 9/11. This could be the reason why Bush has messed the time lapse. He changed in his mind what he already had seen before and what he should say for not to get under suspicion. He is too stupid not only to remember what he should say and what not. The curiosity could be a doom for him. He could not admit that he had already seen the video in his car.
Conclusio: The flash in the South Tower (UA175, WTC2) was a real flash, caused by a detonation of an explosive device inside the building. The most clearly sign is the picture above, „flash South Tower Picture 1“, or better see the whole video to get convinced. Missile hits World Trade Center ( Videolänge 02:15 ) ( Quelle für nebenstehendes Bild, stark vergrößert ) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbCcb6NV8Io
Das magische Auge ! Detailausschnitt Blitz Südturm ! ( Bildquelle: www.youtube.com: "Missile hits World Trade Center")
It is not a lie that the towers were hit by a Boeing and it had been really airplanes of Boeing but it was the military version that hit the South Tower. But the airplane at the North Tower was a commercial Boeing 767. For the flash at the North Tower ( WTC1) several possibilites are imaginable:
What I do not believe: The flash was inserted later by image editing, because the distance of the cameraman to the WTC1 building is relatively large and this fact could have helped the faker of the video material. But this argument is from my point of view not very reasonable although the thought, that all this should heat on conspiracy theories it is worth to get considered. Conspiracy theories should get heated on, to acitivate those people to think about what happened, who spend all their energy in the enlightenment of the real facts. And where do these people normally start with their investigation? For sure at the first video of the attack!
What I do not believe: The flash was caused by the plane itself. But this does not seem to be true because all can realize that the flash is a preceding event.
What I do not believe: The flash was a light reflection. Too many explosions and squibs are visible also later in the moment of the collapse and also before. And I know a testimony talking about huge explosions. Go on and see on youtube and search for „Explosions at WTC“.
WHAT I DO BELIEVE: Also the speaker of the video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbCcb6NV8Io is indicating to the flash as a separate event, to an explosion outside or inside the building. This is what I do believe too. It is a real explosion, which should happen synchonized with the impact of the first plane but got activated by the electronic control center from anywhere in the building of WTC7. The explosion went off a millisecond too early so that it could be seen on the video. But on the other side it is clear. To ensure the total demolition of the sender, the explosion had to go off short before the impact of the plane which was flying on the conducting ray of this equipment. The impact of the plane supported the destruction of the sender and should destroy all traces that could lead to that proof. To support this argument are existing two video proofs which COULD endorse such a theory. A) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcxo_UntbYA (Twin Towers Ufo = Systemtest ? ) B)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WgYP3NTr7s&mode=related&search= Government is responsible for Pentagon Crash ( PT3) Videoposition 00:48
I will come back to this videos in the chapter beyond.
I think, an judicial accusation of Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney is only a question of time. But we can never know in this so called „democracy“. The assassination of John F. Kennedy is not enlightened until now. Do You remember the video taken with a Super 8 camera of Zapruder? The same case: There is this guy standing elevated on a small wall and goes on filming the convoy of cars meanwhile other outstanding observers run away or take at least cover when they heard the shots. Was this man deaf that he could remain so relaxed and kept his camera straight onto the presidential car? Read the book of Marita Lorenz and see her movie. It is enlightening. Kennedy was killed by the CIA, Frank Sturgis was one of the CIA agents who played the main role in this dirty job. They needed Lee Harvey Oswald only to keep on the legend that the russian secret service stood behind the assassination. His legend was perfectly staged and he seemed only to be a victim that could get hanged. With Oswald´s death everything seemed to be clear. But that the former CIA agent Marita Lorenz mentions that Jack Ruby, who killed Oswald also worked for the CIA does not get mentioned in the medias until now. Read the book and You will believe her. Not what we hear on tv and what we can read in the newspapers is true, because these newspapers are all under control of the secret services and the corporates ( = Korporatokratie = coming from „Corp.“) We are all victims of what we are not able to filter out on our own. This is really difficult. And it is no coincidence, that Marita Lorenz explains the reason for the assassination of Kennedy. The US military should had lost a lot of money because he wanted to move off the troups from Vietnam. The same case like 9/11. The military industry is the incitement. Always the money.
It is curious. Normaly I should have started my examination with WTC because it was the first attack. But I did not. I decided to take another way. I put the cart before the horse because I realized at first differences with the version that was presented to the public with the Pentagon attack. Afterwards it was only a logical consequence to get granular on the WTC-attacks. The hoaxes refering to the Pentagon attack were for me more flashiness. But then with my examinations of the WTC, I do not know if I had dug deeper, if I would not have found the video of the first impact with the mysterious flash. I do not know, if I would had come to the idea to search for more proofs of explosions at and inside the buildings going on after the attacks. A facebook friend then gave me the link to William Rodriguez, „The last Man out“ , who speaks of a massive explosion in the B-Level before the impact of the plane in the WTC1 at 08:46. But to get all this, You have to make your own researchs. In the beginning it is always difficult to search for something if you do not know for what you have to search for. Afterwards all seems to be very easy and clear. For 99,9% of the people it is easier to humor the mainstream-medias. They prefer to take over the opinion which is the common opinion of all people. People do not like to swim against the stream. It is for them too exhausting. They prefer to look football on tv and to drink a bottle of beer what makes them drunken. Sometimes less, sometimes more that they can close their eyes. But to try to start the attempt to gain them for other arguments is extremely hard, in particular if we have governments, secret services and sychronized organs (medias) as antagonists which are all under the influence of the big corporations. So it is explainable, that someone who I supposed to be intelligent said to me: „No, I do not believe it and I do not want to engage in it!“. Every stupid person is also intelligent and every intelligent person is also stupid!
But it is unambiguously: There are too many video proofs indicating that the World Trade Center was brought down with a controlled demolition. I remember once more the fact, that WTC6 exploded at the utmost 60 seconds after the impact of the airplane in the South Tower and that WTC7 collapsed within 7 seconds and 7 hours after the collapsing of the North Tower although it had not been hit by an airplane. And the financial investor Silverstein, who had leased the WTC under a new contract shortly before 9/11 with an insurance that was for the first time with the inclosure of terror attacks. If You do not see it until now You are really a stupid ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100 he should have say: „Pull them“ and not „pull it“ That was his mistake!
If you did not realize the reality until now You are a hopeless ignorant. It was an inside job and this minority which is growing to a majority is telling the truth. I am convinced that it was an inside job. I have also learned what is an „operation under false flag“. The following text is taken from the movie „Terrorstrom“ by Alex Jones. http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-8111437486390613589&q=terrorsturm Quelle Terrorstorm ( 18 Minuten ) (Videoposition 03:54 - 05:17) Free translation: What is the meaning of an operation under false flag? The definition is according to the Enzyklopedie: „Secret operation, which are accomplished by goverments, concerns and other organisations which should seem as if they are accomplished by other groups. The term is taken from a military concept, to use identifications of other countries. There are many variants of operations under false flag. The most popular variant is to execute a terror attack and to blame afterwards the political adversary. One of the most famous operations under false flag took place on 02/27/33 and came from Adolf Hitler. Nazi-documents, found after the Second World War and statements of testimonies during the „Nürnberger Prozesse“ uncovered what many historicans had already assumed long before. Hermann Göring had set the Reichstag on fire. The Nazis presented Marinis Vanderlubbe as a scapegoat, a young mentally disabled man, who rolled around in the street behind of the Reichstag when they found them. They blamed him for this in a show trial and fated him to die. He was beheaded on 01/10/34. Hitler abused the crisis to create laws, which are similar to the Patriot Act...“ http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Adolf_Hitler_in_Yugoslavia_crop.JPG ( Quelle des nebenstehenden Bildes , Detailausschnitt )
Adolf Hitler: Als Operation unter falscher Flagge ( =false flag operations ) initiierte sein Gör...ing den Reichstagsbrand. ( Bildquelle Wikipedia, Public Domain, Source: USHMM, Teilausschnitt )
Also as an operation under false flag can be seen the preparation of the invasion into Poland by the faschistic Germany. http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-8111437486390613589&q=terrorsturm Quelle Terrorstorm ( 18 Minuten ) ( Videoposition 05:17- 06:21) „Hitler got to a dictator and had his eye onto the world. In march 1939 Hitler had already captured Tschechoslovakia and Austria. Hitler wanted to enlarge his country to eastern Europe and wanted to annex Poland but did not want to be seen as an agressor. Hitler needed a pretense to attack Poland. Heinrich Himmler created a plan called „Operation Himmler“. On 08/31/39 they took a prisoner from a concentration camp, put him in a polish uniform, brought him to Gleiwitz at the border of Germany and Poland and executed him there. The scenery should act as a polish attack onto a german radio station. The picture of the supposed polish soldier went through the medias. Hitler had his pretense to attack Poland and the nightmare of the Second World War had begun“.
For the day of 9/01/1939, the day of the attack onto Poland and therefore the beginning of the Second World War, the whole press was instructed to be prepared for special editions. Therein was written: „Poland has shot us this night for the first time on our own territory also with its regualar troups. Since 05:45 it is shot back“.
These are only two examples of operations under false flag. The history books are full of it. But why, we should ask, people give them their head? In the most cases these operations under false flag serve to prepare wars. Or they serve like in the case of the „Reichstagsbrand“ ( set on fire of the Reichstag) to create new laws.
( Quelle: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung ) And which laws did create Georg W. Bush after 9/11?USA Patriot-Act
Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism.
With the Patriot Act, passing in October 2001, the minister of inner Affairs John Ashcroft had achieved massive instruments for the fight against terrorism. The most important measures are:Better control of money laundering by restriction of the banking secrecy.Arrest of immigrants up to 7 days for inquiry without declaration of any reasonsCommon use of results of investigations of security authorties without regard of existing protecion of data privacy.Possibility of data transmission from foreing secret services to the investigation authorities.Collected requests for wire tapping of telecommunication and the control of e-mails.
http://www.bpb.de/themen/JS4BHB,0,0,Dokumente_und_Links.html ( Quelle: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung )
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heimatschutzministerium ( Quelle des nebenstehenden Bildes ) Homeland Security Act: November 2002. With this law President Bush created a new powerful department for homeland security and inner security (Department of Homeland Security) concentrating 22 departments under one roof. Central targets is the foreclosure of the United States against inner and outer hazards ( Homeland Security) as well as keeping away threats from the international periphery. A central task of the department is the accumulation and assimilation of informations as well as the delivery and opening up for development of new surveillance- and information technologies, forensic technologies, measures for protection against weapons of mass destructions and the development new weapons, to make for example terrorists incapable of action. http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/13/13613/1.html ( Quelle für obigen Ausschnitt ) With more than 183000 employees (2004) the department got to the third biggest employer of the US-Government. In the Department of Homeland Security some of the institutions were put together that had been before independant, for example the security check at the airports, the costums, the coast guards and the FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). But instead of intentions before, CIA and FBI did not get under its control.
Homeland Security Advisory System: Überlegen Sie sich, auf welcher Stufe die Bush-Regierung einzuordnen ist!
In mai 2007 Georg W. Bush signed the National Security and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 51 (NSPD51) also known as the Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD20) and it was discussed heavily. http://funfire.de/lustige/bilder-3532-bush-hitler.html ( Quelle des nebenstehenden Bildes. Laut Impressum "Freeware")
Quelle des folgenden Textes. http://oraclesyndicate.twoday.net/stories/3815370/ The following text has no relation to the source on the right side. Zitat: Excerpt: „In this directive Georg W. Bush explained, that the president in the case of an extreme emergency is instructed, to lead the activities for the continuance of a constitutional government. The directive is defining a catastrophic emergency case as follows: A catastrophic emergency case calls each event, that are causing a massive loss of human life, material damage or demolition, affecting the population, the infrastructure, the environnement, the economy or other functions of the government of the United States, independant where such an event is taking place.....“ „......The formulation of this directive is disturbing, because it is not determined, that the president in such a case is working together with other organs of the governmental power. (Judicative and Legislative) Instead it is definitely stated, that there will be a collaboration between the three powers coordinated by the president. If the president is coordinating such a collaboration, this makes him to the responsible in all three sectors“. .... ....„The formulation of this directive are making the president in case of a such catastrophy de facto to a dictator....“ .....„This directive is obviously unconstitutionally, because all of the three sectors executive, legislative and judicative should be equal side by side.....“ „....an efficient constitutionally government contents the separation of three equitable powers from each other. But this directive is determining, that the executive has the power to coordinate the other powers.....“
Conclusio: „After 9/11 the United States channeled financial public means in the financing of the military-industrial complex, social programs got cut, public budgets got reorganized and taxes were channeled in the rearmament of the police-and national security system. The struggle against terrorism was used as a base of legitimation to undermine the legal system and to destroy the constitutional state“. Quelle:http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/12/12576/1.html
Normaly it should had been the task of the foreign countries, to liberate the United States from this dictator called Georg W. Bush and to bring the truth about 9/11 as soon as possible to the public. Who is it possible, that democracies are calling themselves democracies, if a governmental lie, a governmental intrigue, an operation under false flag gets supported for so many years?
How the mindset of Germany is, we can see when we read the statement of the „Bundesanwaltschaft“ to the complaint of a lawyer from Berlin against Donald Rumsfeld.
John Ashcroft, war von 2001 bis 2005 Justizminister der Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika !
"Donald Rumsfeld, the former Defense Secretary does not need to have fear of preliminary proceedings in Germany because of torturing prisoners in the iraqian prison Abu Ghaib and in the prison camp Guantanamo in Cuba. This is the task of the therefor appointed justice of the United States. In november 2006 a lawyer from Berlin had passed in preliminary proceedings against Donald Rumsfeld and other US-officials at the Bundesanwaltschaft. (Source: Memminger Zeitung)
If Donald Rumsfeld would had entered Germany after his retirement as a Defense Secretary and before this decision of the Bundesanwaltschaft, so he should have had to expect to get arrested and he would not have been able to count onto his immunity. (content Source DER SPIEGEL)
Schwarze Krähen im Gleichschritt : Das Verhältnis der Bundesanwaltschaft zu Donald ( Duck ) Rumsfeld läßt sich am besten mit den Worten beschreiben: " Die eine Krähe hackt der anderen Krähe kein Auge aus" !
I remain to my opinion. We cannot speak of a democracy, if it is possible to governments to hide the truth about 9/11 so many years from the public, if they did not publish until now all the videos of the surveillance cameras of the Pentagon attack what could give us clarity. A journalist called Robert Stevens had to die, because he tried to proove with pictures, that the supposed hijacker Mohammed Atta (WTC1), who visited a flight school in Lantana was not the Atta, who got indenticated as the terror pilot. Stevens died of an agressive form of anthrax variant as he received an infected letter by mail. No wonder if nobody in the United States dares to open his mouth. Because they all know, that they were living under Bush in a perfect hidden dictatorship. A journalist called Daniel Hopsicker investigated in Venice, Florida, the place that came into the headlines of the newspapers as a trainingscamp for terrorpilots and he debunked, that Atta indeed had licences as a pilot from different countries. But he also met testimonies, who would have been able to make statements in front of the 9/11 commission, but they had never been heard. Mrs. Keller, who lived together with Mohammed Atta, was told by the FBI after 9/11/2001, better to moove house quickly and to keep quiet, what she did, until she got interviewed by Hopsicker one year later. Obviously her statement would not have fit to the picture of the icecold islamist, the government wanted to sell to the public. Because Mrs. Keller was a dessous-model. http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/16/16796/1.html The public is standing under mind control. They can tell us what they want, most of the people believe what they tell us. Only a few are able to connect some other points together like I did on my homepage. This is something what normaly everybody should do. But they are too lazy or too stupid and the dirty secret services are destroying the lifes of those who know too much about the truth. This is the so called democracy which does in fact not exist. The americans are living in a hidden dictatorship led by Georg W. Bush.
Mohammed Atta, der angebliche Anführer der Terroranschläge vom 11. September. Er soll im ersten Flugzeug gesessen sein. Die Frage ist nur: WO ?
And now we come to a point where I want to bring forward an argument of Andreas von Bülow written in his book „Die CIA und der 11.September“. „According to estimations in more that 600 airplanes the computer-controlled guidance with backdoor for circuit-entering of the radio control is installed. The american government did until now remain silent to the assumptions described here. A greater european airline took the acquaintance of the radio control possibility as a reason, to remove and to substitute the factory provided flight control computer from their float. The author of the remote control theory under the headline “Home Run“ does not want to mention the name of the european airline, because he has fear to get claimed of compensation for damages. But he adds sneaking, if he would have the joice, he would fly in 2001 the route from Atlanta to Singapur via New York, Frankfurt am Main and Kuala Lumpur with the following airplanes: From Atlanta to John F-Kennedy I in New York he would fly propably with a Boeing 737, from there with a Boeing 777 to Frankfurt am Main. There he would decide to take an Airbus A340 to Kuala Lumpur and the last part of the journey he would make in a DC9 or a Fokker100. About the joice of routes and the jettypes of the airlines one could guess with some efforts, which airline he means.
I am convinced, that the Boeing 767 of the American Airlines, crashing into the North Tower as well as the Boeing that had hit the South Tower and looked very similar to a United Airlines, were radio controlled from the rooms of WTC7 by the DIA.
Wo befand sich die Steuerung des Cockpits? Die Steuerung des Cockpits kann nachweislich bei ca. 600 Maschinen von außen erfolgen Auch Andreas von Bülow vertritt die Ansicht, dass die Maschinen von außen gesteuert wurden ( Siehe: Die führende Rolle des WTC 7 )
The World Trade Center was marked with a radio transmitter as well as the Pentagon to make sure that the airplanes could find their goal. A long time ago I found a very interesting video. I thought a lot of times if I should embed it on my homepage and then decided not to do it. But then I found another video which seems to support the theory of LOOSE CHANGE, that there was also a marking of the Pentagon. Could it be, that the following is a check of the systems at WTC? Look on your own. But I am not sure.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcxo_UntbYA twin towers ufo Howewer I have to raise concerns, that I did get the answer that this video was taken a longer time before 9/11. The oldest and the longest version ( duration:30 seconds) was embedded on youtube in oktober 2006. The position of the nearest point of the approach to the building could be the position of the marker. It is indeed the side of the later impact of the plane at the North Tower but is not really identically with the point where it happened later. Many articles to this video assume that it is faked, but I am convinced that it is real, whatever the flight object was. First of all the video should have been taken at a time when the Twin Towers were still standing and at this time before 9/11 nobody could know, that they would get the goal of a terror attack. This means that the fake must have made before 9/11, if it is really a fake. Secondly you see very clearly, that the cameraman tries to focus onto the flight object and I think that it is really difficult to add focusings afterwards into the video because at the same time when he is focusing, the astonishment of the woman gets visible, when she is looking through the lense of her own camera and when she is giving her wondering expression with the words: „What is that?“. She does not seem to play a role. If it was really a military flight object, what I believe, then we have to question, why the military made this test in the presence of so many testimonies? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOavIBd0EFw ( Taken over by Japan Television )
And now to the Pentagon marking or whatever it was. Possible that it is a coincidence that this line on the lawn shows exactly the way of the airplane. zuflog. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8WgYP3NTr7s&mode=related&search= Government is responsible for Pentagon Crash! ( PT3) Videoposition 00:48
Quelle: Verschwörungstheorien zum 11. September 2001 Wikipedia http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verschw%C3%B6rungstheorien_zum_11._September_2001 here You can compare and what I say to the Wikipedia comments: WTC:Interesting for me is, that those guys who wrote this articles refered to reports of NIST. (National Institut of Standard and Technology) But they do not mention with one word, to which organisation NIST belongs. It is not an independent organisation. It belongs to the US-Department of Commerce and so their explanation why the towers fell is worthless. These guys are too stupid to see the truth. They don´t want to see it and of course Wikipedia is influenced by the government. It is redacted!Silverstein said „pull it“, but he should have said „pull them“, did he mean the „fireworkers“ or did he mean „it“, the building WTC7? Curious !
UA93 See the cloud of smoke and compare it with the clouds you see after bombings in Afghanistan. It is very similar. A pilot of a Boeing 757 I asked personally about the calculated amount of kerosine estimated that 19 tons should had been remained in the wings of the airplane. So do You really believe, that 19 tons of kerosine disappear after a second ?
AIR DEFENSE: Ridiculous is the comment about the non-reaction of the air defense according to the 9/11 commission report: „The handbooks were not configured to attacks coming from the inland“. AHA. They first have to read the handbooks, very interesting, but in oktober 2000 and March 2001 emergency exercises were simulated in the Pentagon and pictures from that time showing larger parts of airplane debris lying around in the inner yard of the Pentagon. I thought that in any case it is the task of the air defense to take care that all airplanes remain in their admitted corridor. If not, the consequence should be the shot down procedure! Was this word „shot down procedure invented after 9/11. For sure not! To read this Wikipedia shit is really crazy. It is an impertinence. Transponder: Also ridiculous to argue, that an airplane with swithed off transponder cannot get localized. Read again what I wrote about primary and secondary radar! Switched off transponder means no secondary radar but primary radar remains in any case! Why should the military spend millions of dollars in the stealth technology if they could get invisible easier?
These are only some arguments but it comes better. In 2006 , when I wrote this text for my homepage I found on Wikipedia http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verschw%C3%B6rungstheorien_zum_11._September_2001 the following text. This textpart disappeared completely. This means, that Wikipedia is redacted by the governments. Typical for dictatorships. But now I want to translate the mission german text into english. That text was really very good and it is worth to mention it: „Most of the skeptik assume that the airplanes were radio-controlled. According to their theories the control has to go out from a ground station (WTC7) and accordingly taken over by C-130 airplanes, or the passenger jets had been changed by uncrewed doubles. Already in 1988 the NASA executed 14 radio controlled flights with a BOEING 707, undergoing in the end in a crash test. For the variant of the exchange speaks according to the conspiracy theorist the fact, that at least 3 of the 4 aircrafts changed during the flight their transpondercode, but none of the aircrafts indicated an emergency or hijacking case. While body parts and also a passport of the supposed hijackers of AA11 were found in the debris of the WTC Complex, the blackboxes of the airplanes that crashed into the Twin Towers according to the authorities were never discovered. This is for the skeptic noncredible. A fireworker and a voluntary helper stated in 2003, they had found 3 of the 4 blackboxes and handed it over to the authorities. The aircontrollers of the Washington Dulles Airport supposed, that flight AA77 (Pentagon) was because of its agility and speed a fighter. Hani Hanjour is supposed to be one of the Kamikaze pilots of flight AA77. His former flight instructor on the other side does not trust him to fly a propeller aircraft like a Cesna. Also the flight routes are suspicious, because the hijackers would have needed too much time and the aread would have offered them only less orientation points. The secret blueprint „Operation Northwoods“ is serving to conspiracy theorists as an example for the tinkable specific use of a radio controlled airplane in military circles of the USA. In 1962 the chairman of the United General Staff porposed to the Secretary of Defense, to execute assassinations within the United States and to stage abroad military incidents, to blame the Castro Regime in Cuba for it, to herald an invasion of the island. To this belonged also the exchange of a passenger jet with an uncrewed military jet south of Florida. After that, the military airplane should take over the place of the civil aircraft on the radar screens, should send out a recorded emergency call per radio, to suggest the attack of an unfriendly jet and should get blow up soon after“. ( End of the former Wikipedia translation which now is unfortunately deleted=redacted)
Do You believe now what I believe finally and once more repeated? On 9/11 there was only one commercial jet with passengers on board. It was the airplane that hit WTC1.
An aircraft Boeing 767 ( flight AA11) hit the North Tower (WTC1) of the World Trade Center. It was controlled from WTC7 by Rumsfeld´s special DIA secret service.AA11 (WTC1)and UA175 (WTC2) startet both from Boston with destination to Los Angeles. This is the official version. AA11 startet for sure from Boston with destination to Los Angeles. But the legend of the passengers were distributed onto the other airplanes. The authorities had to tell the relatives of the AA11 flight only that the passengers had taken not the American Airlines flight AA11 from Boston to LA, but an United Airlines fligth UA175 from Boston to LA. This is really easy. Into the South Tower crashed also a Boeing (UA175). But it was an airplane of a different sort. It was very similar to a Boeing 767 but got changed to fly like a cruise missile and no passenges were on board. It was not a lie if they tell us that it was a Boeing. Two Boeings met in the WTC. One the North Tower, the other one the South Tower. Boeing is constructing also missiles. Airplane with code N612UA (on 9/11 = UA175) is according to FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) still listed as valid http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=1659812406812735870 So my theory could fit that the airplane that hit the WTC2 was another missileplane.It was a Global Hawk that hit the Pentagon. But where are the passengers of AA77 like Barbara Olsen? According to FAA the airplane AA77 is destroyed but according to Transportation Statistics AA77 was not even scheduled on 9/11. It got not destroyed at the Pentagon what we can see when we see the video. So the second statement could be true that it was not scheduled on 9/11. But any other airplane existed approaching to the Pentagon which had the similar size of a Boeing 757. It must have been landed anywhere. Perhaps on the Ronald Reagan Airport from which the drone startet in the same moment when AA77 landed in Washington.In all 4 airplanes had only been 204 passengers. They fit also in one airplane, right? Flight UA93 will give us here the solution, because I believe that flight UA93 (Shanksville) made indeed an emergency landing in Cleveland and the passengers got evacuated in the NASA Research Center. It has its reason that the tower of Cleveland got evacuated. They couldn´t use the testimonies. UA93 was a special flight of the secret service. The pilot worked for the Government and the passengers were also working for the government. If all people died in AA11 (WTC1), then UA175 (WTC2), AA77 (Pentagon), UA93 (Shanksville) must have been landed and evacuated or had not been scheduled that day. You have to admit that 204 passengers are not very much for 4 airplanes. They had been all in one airplane! Yes?
Puff und weg ! Eine Rauchwolke ist alles, was von der Boeing 757 , Flug UA93 , vom Absturz bei Shanksville übrigbleibt. Merkwürdig, dass die von einem Boeing-Piloten errechneten 19 Tonnen Kerosin so schnell verpuffen können. http://www.wtc-terrorattack.com/shankesville/shanksville.htm
This is my conclusio: There was no Boeing 757 that crashed nearby Shanksville (UA93). The alleged heroic fights onboard of the airplane are nothing more than an instrumentalizing, to adjust the people onto a heroic war and the story was invented because the United States always need their heroes. If there had been a fourth aricraft, it should had get shot down, what we can expect after such a long time had passed from 08:46 to 10:03. At least at the second impact in the WTC2 the airdefense should had got activated, because at least after the second attack it had to be clear, that the situation was extremely serious. At 09:45 (see chapter UA93) all airplanes got the instruction to go down at the nearest airport. At this time the UA93 was supposed to be already in the hand of the kidnappers. It crashed at 10:03 nearby Shanksville. At 10:18 is documented the first phone call Cheney to Bush to talk about the instructions of the interceptors. This waste of time until they contacted each other had all system. This was the agreement to confuse all. Nobody seemed to had the responsibity. It had all system. The Cleveland airport including the tower was evacuated, to allow the rats of the secret service to take place instead of the normal flight controllers. To reach that, the UA93 went up to gain height to be able to go afterwards sharp down, so that they got an arguement for the evacuation of the Cleveland Airport believing that it would crash into the airport. This was really the official explanation: Because they feared that if could hit the airport. (See mathematic calculations in chapter UA93 which makes a landing in Cleveland possible at 10:45 after it had been nearby Shanksville )
Once more: Impact North Tower: 08:46 AA11 Impact South Tower: 09:03 UA175 Impact Pentagon: 09:43 AA77 Crash Shanksville: 10:03 UA93
Did You ever see parts of the airline that allegedly crashed nearby Shanksville like we know that from other airplane crashs, for example Lockerby? They want to tell us that the aircraft crashed with such a high speed that it nearly disappeared? Can the speed so high, that the petrol disappears and only a small smoke cloud is visible? ( See „Strömungsberechnung“) It appeared only a dark could, ascending only in the moment of the crash and no smoke of burning petrol, hidden in the moisted earth comes after it. I do not believe this complete story. It was a bomb to enlarge the already existing gap of the former coal shaft in the underground. (See chapter UA93) The coroner moved off very soon because there was not much to see. Source: Gerhard Wisnewski: „Also there one found less remains, and much more surprising was, that the body parts had no more blood in their bodies, like the appropriate coroner Wally Miller declared. What indicates, that it had been old, afterwards places body parts.“
Mayor of Shanksville Ernie Stull: „No airplane“!..... Completely destroyed“ but see it on Your own to read between the lines. Denny Roddy: „Airplane debirs? Nothing that I could identify“..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMX7NuuTbpU
The argument, that was supporting the theory of a terrorattack in Shanksville and the others hijackings, was the statement of the relatives, that they got telephone calls via mobile phones and airphones coming from the hijacked airplanes. Who dares to contradict, because they had lost their relatives and nobody wants to hurt them in their pain?
Shanksville, Wenig Rauch um Nichts ! ( Quelle:www.wtc-terrorattack.com)
For me it is the question, who believable are the statments of the actual telephone calls. A question that is not only interesting for the passengers of UA93 but also for all other passengers in the other airplanes if they really existed. Barbara Olsen (AA77) succeeded to talk two times with her husband via airphone. She is it, who gave the first information that the hijackers had knifes, plastic knifes or box cutters. And also after the last crash in Shanksville we got the information that in other airplanes had been found plastic knifes. These are for sure informations that should support the knife-theory. For sure the knifes were placed there later by agents of the secret service. It is the same like the passport of a supposed hijacker of flight AA11, hitting the WTC. They want to tell us the uncredible story that they found this passport anywhere in the streets of New York nearby WTC and were able to identify the person as a hijacker. This is no joke! I ask You: What happens to a passport if the hijacker is in the cockpit, or let me say anywhere in the aircraft that hits a building. Does it get wings and learns to fly? Damned!
She supposed to sit in the aircraft that hit the Pentagon. She was journalist and advocate, konservative commentator for CNN and her husband was a high judicial officer. (Federal Prosecutor General) This relation should make you perplex. Once more you can read the chapter „Medien“, where I give good arguments for the existing relations between medias and secret services.
Bülow is writing in his book on page 117: „Ted Olsen informed CNN, his wife had told him, all passengers including crew members were horded in the rear part of the airplane by armed hijackers. As weapons she had only mentioned knifes and boxcutters. She had the impression, that nobody on board has the responsibility and begged her husband, to inform the pilot what he should do“.
Bülow mentions, that it is not possible to make telephone calls on the account of the called person without reading in the credit card. But if she had borrowed the credit card of another passenger, she could have used the telephone for an unlimited time. The amount is getting charged on the credit card generally. But Ted Olsen stated in the „London Telegraph“, that his wife had called „collect“, to make the phone call on charge of the Department of Justice. This is simply not possible (03/05/02) Source: Andreas von Bülow, S. 120
Ted Olsen is a liar and I can imagine, that his wife is living anywhere on this world with a new identity and financially supported by the secret service DIA. Perhaps they should start a wanted poster on all airports of this world and perhaps of all passengers that lost their lifes on 9/11. But for sure people came to death in AA11 but I think her husband should know in which airplane his wife is sitting. Did she die in AA11 and her husband got the order to tell the story the Government wanted to hear? I do not like the combination CNN and Federal Prosecutor General. This is for me suspicious!
But to take part in this dirty play is a lot of talent as an actor is necessary. I can suppose that a man like Olsen is able to play his role. He is accustomed to play a role in his position. He has to be always more clever than his adversaries he has to judge about. This is his job. If he would not be able to do that, he wold not had get onto this position. And I repeat that for sure all of the 204 people are dead. But if they all had been all in AA11 (WTC1) and died there, all of the others have to be alive. For example the passengers of UA93 (Shanksville) or of AA77 (Pentagon) if really passengers had been on boad. Dropouts exist all over the world. And supported by the government they do not need to have fear, unless they open their mouth to tell the truth. The way into a life with a new identity must had been prepared by the secret service and the Government. I think it is the easiest problem to let people simply disappear, anyhow. Perhaps the remained at home do really believe that their relatives came to death. Everything is possible in the country of the unlimited possiblities. Only such an idea or reality? Mohammed Atta (AA11, WTC1) is for sure dead. This is also saying his father, a laywer in Kairo, who allegedly got one day (or three days after 9/11, depends of source) a phone call of his son. He supposed that his son was kidnapped or killed.
"Kartonschneidemesser", "box cutter" ? Ich soll glauben, dass damit vier Flugzeuge einschließlich des gesamten WTC Komplexes zerstört wurden? Es könnte ja eigentlich fast lustig sein, wenn es nicht so traurig wäre. Traurig ist in erste Linie das abgrundtiefe Verbrechertum geheimdienstmäßig gesteuerter Politik! Rumsfeld spricht am 9.10.2001 gegenüber Dan Rather in der Sendung CBS News sogar von Plastikmessern. Und Fox News am 16.11.2001 spricht ebenfalls von Plastikmessern. Für wie blöd haltet ihr Drecks Politiker mich eigentlich?
Propably many people in the United States realized the real background of 9/11, but only a few tried to speak what the really saw, what they heard (explosions) and what they thought. Do You remember Tom Daschle? He was at that time majorityleader of the democrats in the US-senat and was one of those, who got a letter with a special message and a special content. The letters contained a message of agressive Anthrax spores, perilous on the way of inhalation. Besides of Daschle was onother letter with an agressive variant or Anthrax that was sent to the democratic delegate Patrick Leavy. Neither in this nor in the other case the envelope was opened by one of the above mentioned persons. In the case of Daschle the letter was opened by a co-worker and in the case of Leavy it was assured in a confiscated postbag. The letters to the senators contained a highly refined, dry powder, consisting of about one gram pure spores, which was categorized as weaponized. The FBI demented the denomination „weaponized“ according to the Washington Post in september 2006. Altogether 22 persons got infected by this attacks, 11 persons by the perilous way of inhalation. 5 people died as a consequence of the inhalation. Among the victims was a reporter of „THE SUN“, called Robert Stevens. His chief Michael Irish had rented an appartment to two of the hijackers and was a former member of the CIVIL AIR PATROL in Lantana, where Mohammed Atta took flight instructions in august 2001. Stevens stated, that Atta, who had visited the flight school was another person that this one, who was identified as the hijacker Atta. He wanted to proof this with pictures. (Former Source) http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verschw%C3%B6rungstheorien_zum_11._September_2001
Why do all these articles disappear? Because they are wrong or because they do not fit to the official story? We know all that people died of Anthrax. So anything must be true at this story.
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthrax-Anschl%C3%A4ge_2001 ( Textquelle ) All letters contained at least two different grades of the Anthrax-virus.A fine powder adressed to the senators. (Most dangerous variant in the way of inhalation)A brown granulated powder to the media representatives in New York City, which caused skin infections.Besides it is supposed, that the Anthrax-material that was sent to an old letterbox of the National Enquierer was an intermediate level similar to the quality of the Anthrax in the letters to the senators. „Although the qualities of the production of anthrax were different, the whole material came from the same virus clade- known under the name Ames-clade, which was produced in the biological weapon repository of the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases ( USAMRID), Fort Detrick Maryland. The Ames clade was contributed in at least fifteen biological research laboratories within the USA and six to overseas. In the beginning of December 2001 was conducted a DNA-sequencing of the Anthrax virus of the first victim called Robert Stevens under the leadership of the Institute for Genomic Research. Within one month the examination was finished. The analysis was published in the Journal Science 2002. The analysis revealed a row of differences, basing onto examinations in England. A further test series showed, that the anthrax was identically with the Ames-clade of Fort Detrick. A radiocarbon dating, conducted by from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in 2002 prooved, that the Anthrax was microbiological cultivated not longer than two years after the sending of the letters. In october 2006 was reported, that the water, that was supplied for the development of the Anthrax spores was originally coming from a spring in north-east of the United States. According to press releases in 2003 attempts of the Reverse Engeneering failed the reconstruction of the Anthrax from the letters under the leadership of the FBI.“ http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthrax-Anschl%C3%A4ge_2001
In july 2007 the chemist Bruce Irvins committed suicide, who was employed at the US-Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Deseases ( Fort Detrick) and was accused by the FBI to stand as single delinquent behind the Anthrax attack. When the attorney Jeffrey Taylor is going to spoke to the press reporters and announced, that from the point of view of the Government Bush with the suicide of Irvin the enlightenment of the Anthrax attacks is completed, all alarm bells were ringing in my head. Even more because he demonstratively slammed the folder which was lying in front of him on his desk. For me it looked like he wanted to say: Forget it now! FBI-investigator Joseph Persichini: „An acribic examination brought us to the conclusion, that Dr. Bruce Ivens is responsible for the death, the suffer and the fear, that came above our country with the sending of the Anthray letters in 2001“.
And I got right because years passed by and what happened under Obama: Is the Obama Government now the reason, that they thought a second time about what they said before? Because in the edition 11/09 is reported, that doubts appeared about the origin of the Anthrax-spores. „The chemical fingerprint does not fit definitely to the Anthrax material of the supposed deliniquent Bruce Irvins“. The US-material scientist Josph Michael of Sandia National Laboratories in new Mexico is reporting, that the material contained spurs of silicium, oxygen, iron and tin. But these elements had not been found in this test tube (Code RMR-1029) to which the chemist Irvins had access. Irvins had always denied to be responsible for the attacks. „Admittedly seven further samples, six coming from Fort Detrick and one from a laboratory in Utah, contained the suspicous material“. ( SPIEGEL 11/09)
Milzbrandinfektion, der dunkle Schatten der CIA ! ( Bildquelle Wikipedia Public Domain )
Anthrax letters with less dangerous content received also the NEW YORK POST and the NBC in New York: They contained the following wording: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthrax-Anschl%C3%A4ge_2001 09-11-01 THIS IS NEXT TAKE PENACILIN [sic] NOW DEATH TO AMERICA DEATH TO ISRAEL ALLAH IS GREAT
Der Inhalt der Briefe an die Senatoren Daschle und Leahy lautete: 09-11-01 YOU CAN NOT STOP US. WE HAVE THIS ANTHRAX. YOU DIE NOW. ARE YOU AFRAID? DEATH TO AMERICA. DEATH TO ISRAEL. ALLAH IS GREAT. " Ende Zitate aus Quelle Wikipedia: Anthrax Anschläge 2001 http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthrax-Anschl%C3%A4ge_2001
If you are reading the following sentences, you have to think 180° around the corner to make a conclusion about the sender. Not fanatic moslem extremists, but american extremists of the secret service are standing behind the anthrax attacks. This work bears the hand writing of the desinformation department of any secret service and Irvins is only one victim under many others who had worked at the wrong time at the wrong place.
Strukturformel des Penicillins. Sind die Typen von der CIA sogar zu blöd, dieses Wort richtig zu schreiben ? Bush hätte es so geschrieben: Penny-cilin. Aber mit Kleingeld gibt er sich nicht ab. ( Bildquelle Wikipedia, GNU-Lizenz )
There was one statement that at once after the hijacking of the aircrafts the transponder were switched off by the terrorist and the position of the airplanes could no longer get controlled. They were switched off, yes, but who had been the persons who switched off the transponders? Terrorists or pilots working for the government in a special mission?
„In the modern flying it is worked with secondary-radar, and most of them are equipped with primary radar. Meanwhile with the primary radar ( MODE C) the controller gets secured informations about direction, height and distance of the targets, the secondary radar still delivers further informations like recognition, identification and also height of the flight object. Most important advantage of the secondary radar (active) to the primary radar (passive) is the larger range as well as the possibility of the identification (flight number for example). The secondary radar is sending out a signal, that gets received by the transponder of the airplane which now sends out an active answer. If the transponder howewer is switched off or broken, so the secondary radar is not able to work and the flight object does not get recognized. Therefore most of the secondary radars are working in correspondence with a primary radar.“
So far so good. But if the terrorists switched off the transponder, the primary radar is still working. How does that fit together with the explanation of the controllers , that the airplane could not longer get tracked.
It is sure, that a transponder which got switched off by terrorists does not mean automaticly that the airplane is unvisible, „because this would lead the stealth-technology as well as the military radarsystems ad absurdum. Objects of a special size, in special heights are reflecting radarsignaturs, which can get recognized, independent of an active or inactive transponder“. http://www.debattierclub.net/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=4306
Did the terrorists use a stealth bombers or did they fly in a low altitude flight across the United States? Ah, exactly this must have succeeded the terrorpilot Hani Hanjour approaching the Pentagon with his Boeing 757 on the last meters. You can see his professional low altitude flight on the video of chapter „Pentagon 9/11“. RESPECT !
The question remains: How did Hanjour really loose his life?
Hani Hanjour flog im Tiefflug über Washington direkt in das Pentagon. Da hatte selbst das Radar keine Chance ! Im Tiefflug hatte er zwar Probleme mit der Orientierung, aber dafür waren die Wegweiser der Autobahn umso besser lesbar.( Bildquelle Wikipedia, Public Domain )
I don´t know, but for sure not in the Pentagon! And I am sure that he is dead.
Without any doubt there had been people who knew more in the forefront of the attacks. This we can recognize if we see the tradevolume at the Chicago Board Options Exchange where options of 1400 big companies are dealed. These dealings are very speculative bettings onto the market price on particular shares. We distinguish between:
CALL-Options: This is a „buy“ stock warrant. This warrant certifies the right to buy a special amout of shares of a special corporation at a previously determined date or within a special timerange to an exercise price that is previously determined.
PUT-Options: This is a „sell“ stock warrant. This warrant certifies the right to sell a special amout of shares of a special corporation at a previously determined date or within a special timerange to an exercise price that is previously determined.
In every option-contract are packed together about 100 shares. These kind of dealings are bettings onto the prospecive development of a corporation and are leading in 85% of the cases to the totaly loss of the adopted money of private investors. But professionals are using the derivative dealings like an ensurance for an existing share deposit and liquidate the position after a short time. The calculation of the necessary amount of options for hedging a deposit is calculated with a special formula depending of the amount of shares the investor has in his deposit. If a big investor for example has in his deposit shares of s special corporation and the investor is expecting that an innerpolitical or a global political decision or event could lead to a disavowal of the share price of the corporation in which he has invested his money, so he buys PUT-Options if he is thinking that the share price of the underlying corporation will go down. With this deal he avoids to sell his shares he has in his deposit. With an accuring event these Put Options react with an enormous leverage effect on the underlying course of the basis instrument (in this case the share). While the share price is decreasing, the PUT-options are ensuring with their x-times higher leverage with an upward movement of the price (in the opposite direction than the share itself) a gain of money and are compensating the loss of the price of the underlying share.
And exactly such PUT-options were bought before 9/11/2001 above-average, also if we do not hear about the dealings in the mainstream medias. The truth we do not find out from newspapers, the truth we can read in books written by insiders.
The source is taken from Eric Laurant, under reference of a 38 year old deputy chairman of one of the most notable banks of the world, who perspiciously is begging not to be mentioned with his name, because her fears dammage to his bank and for himself. Discretion is in this branch the highest command.
Excerpt 1: Eric Laurent S.46, Between september 6th and 7th had been bought 4744 sell options ( PUT) on the shares of United Airlines, while on the other side had only been 396 buy options (CALL) in the same period of time. On september 10th, one day before the attack, 4516 put-options onto American Airlines were bought, but only 748 Call-Options onto shares of American Airlines. This volume is 25 times higher than the other transactions normally onto these two shares. And these purchases are not justified by special news on the stock exchange. When the american market opened again on september 17th, the shares of United Airlines had lost 42%. The propable gain for the insider were nearly 5 million Dollars. The shares of American Airlines lost 39%. In this case supposed gain were at least 4 million dollars“.
Additionally I want to mention, that an airplane of American Airlines hit the Northtower and the Pentagon and an airplane of United Airlines hit the Southtower of WTC. (allegedly)
Excerpt 2: Andreas von Bülow „Die CIA und der 11. September“, S.64: Already ten days after the terror attacks the Israeli Herzliya International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism had stated the following insiderdeals in reference to 9/11: United Airlines: 4744 shares sold, compared with a normal average of 396; American Airlines: 4515 shares sold, compared to 748. Both transactions had been eleven - respectively six times higher than the usual normal size.
Shares of Morgan Stanley Dean Winter, the bank that had allocated 22 floors of the World Trade Center, were sold in a size of 2157 shares in three days before the attack, compared to 27 before september 6th. On 9/11 the shares of Morgan Stanley went down from 48,9 to 42,5 dollars so that the investor gained at least 1,2 million dollars. Flight UA175 hit the South Tower between the 78th and the 84th floor. The bank of Morgan Stanley Winter had rented rooms from the 88th floor to the 110th floor.
Of Merril Lynch, the company that had also rented 22 floors in WTC, had been sold 12215 shares in 4 days before the attack, compared to normaly 252 per day the time before.
Although the transactions had been determined, the names of those insiders had never been announced until now. Also the list of the 38 companies, who dealed with shares and options of the companies, which suffered unter a dammage caused by 9/11, is not published until now. The german Bundesbank in Frankfurt/M. also assumed in their examinations, that massive inside tradings had taken place. In some reports are mentioned advices, that it had been high co-operators of the Bush-Administration, who had places appropriate orders. But until now, the publicity is waiting for the results of FBI and of FinCEN (Financial Crimes Enforcement Network =Special Secret Service of the Federal Finance Administration).“
I remember very well that in the medias was speculated, if the „multimillionaire“ Osama bin Laden, who was immediately blamed to be responsible for the terrorattacks, could have taken financial profit with this dealings. But if we read the statements of the finance minister Paul O`Neill at the bank commission of the US-senate, we could arrive at the conclusion that the american authorities did not have any interest to enlighten the most terrible terror attack in the history of the United States. Because if they are really convinced that bin Laden stood behind these transactions, everybody should be interested to prove it. Laurent wrote in his book: „Before the true source can be identified, one had to investigate throughout ten maskfirms“. This is obviously for the minister, the federal agencies and the complete Bush-Administration a not manageable task“.
For me personally it is out of any question, that it was an american government mafia, who lead the airplanes into the towers. Respective to the above mentioned insider dealings we now must ask the question, if it had really been persons around Muhammed Atta who conducted the airplane of American Airlines (AA11) into the North Tower. Because only the fact, that increased trading activities with PUT-options had taken place which also had been realized by ingenuous retailers should had alarm the supervisors. „The CIA is observing the activities in realtime and is using special programs, based on a software with the code-name „PROMIS“. ( Eric Laurent S.61) The following disburdens once more the CIA: No doubt, that the CIA realized straight before the attacks high purchases of US-bonds. This was revealed on 10/02/2001 by the WALL STREET JOURNAL. „The transactions must have been the vertiginous sum of about 5 billion dollars....these bonds with a duration of 5 years are the best type of investment in view of a possible world wide crisis, especially if the Untited States are affected. And they often rise in the case, if the investors suddenly are leaving high risky investments at the stock exchange market“. (Eric Laurent S.53)
These uncoverings disburden indeed these parts of the CIA, who ran the informations forward to the public. But this does not mean that all CIA agents are inculpable. I mentioned already before that CIA director Georg Tenet seems to be someone who tried to wake up the goverment to force them to get active, but the government didn´t want to do anything. Whatelse should he have could done than nearly shaking the National Security Advisor Condeleeze Rice to get active? But she wiped the warnings of an imminent terror attack off the table. „We did everything except of firing off the weapon that was pointed onto her head“. I indeed believe that Tenet is innocent although he is a friend of Bush. But Bush was also only a puppy for those who planed the attack. He should only do his job, to give his signature to all papers they gave him and the others behind him arranged his business. The less he knows, the less he can babble. But the question remains, when Bush got the first information about the first attack of WTC1? Already in his car? Did he see the video there already? You remember: He was bubbling the wrong when he was asked when he had got the first information. The video of the first attack was not available on 9/11! But he said that he saw it on a television screen before he entered the classroom. The system was to hide the plans against those who stood in the middle of the publicity. Every wrong word could uncover the plan. Did You ever see in interview of Dick Cheney in tv? I did not. Cheney was supposed to be the man of decisions behind Bush. Bush was only his elongated arm. This is a common estimation of the relation between Bush and Cheney. Rumsfeld had with the budget of the DIA the money to arrange all that. He had the connections to the military industry to arrange the terror attack. I am convinced. And the special secret service within the DIA is also not an imagination. This secret service exists. With his budget and the knowhow of the DIA they were able the arrange 9/11. Rumsfeld and Cheney tricked Tenet´s CIA and Tenet himself who stood there like the biggest idiots on earth! The reaction of the FBI that confiscated the videos of the Pentagon attack had been only an order coming from above. The FBI agents had to do what they had to do and that was coming from above when the machinery of 9/11 got activated. The FBI is as an institution is not guilty!
But it is not out of the question, that any CIA or FBI agents knew what would happen on 9/11. Those who have seen the confiscated videos of the Pentagon attack know for sure what really happened. It is their task not to talk about it and afterwards they cannot get blamed for something what they did not know before. It is the machinery, it is the system they have to obey and afterwards they could change the terrible facts.
Refering to the insider dealings emerge two names. Mayo A.Shattuck III.: The director of the „Bank Alex Brown“, going together in a merger with „Banker´s Trust“ in 1997, and was absorbed in 1999 by the „Deutsche Bank“. Shortly after 9/11 Shattuck quited his lucrative job. „According to the official explanation the director of Alex Brown wants to spend more time with his family and this would not be compatible with his duties, calling him two times of the year to Germany“. (Eric Laurent S.62)
Buzzy Krongard: He got in 1991, at the same time when Shattuck took over the chairmanship of Alex Brown, General Director of „Alex Brown“. After the merger with Bankers Trust he got deputy chairman of Bankers Trust, changed afterwards to the CIA. With his title of managing director he was since 03/16/2001 the number three after Georg Tenet. Krongard got just charge of the „task to discover irregularities on the financial markets“. ( Eric Laurent, S.64) Shattuck and Krongard had been a „unseparable couple. The Bank ( Alex Brown) owes its boom their collaboration“. ( Eric Laurent, S.64)
Treasonable is not only the retirement of Shattuck from his position of director of the bank shortly before 9/11 but also the fact, that of all things „some“ ( Eric Laurent, S.64) purchases of Put-Options were executed before the attacks. Disburdening for Krongard could get the fact, that he admitted in his function of a CIA-responsible the filtering of treasonable trading activities and the transmission of the informations about insider dealings of US-Treasuries to the public.
But the behaviour of the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) is curious: „The SEC which is normaly merciless going ahead against peculators is in this case peculiar impassive, although it would had been competent. All the same the SEC director Richard Walker who was responsible for the security of the markets was praised in october 2001 on the occasion of his retirement in a communique for his „quickened enthusiasm and his self-abandonment““. (Eric Laurent S.67)
„The incorruptible Richard Walker, who was responsible for the non-enlightened and outrageous fraud by insiders respective to 9/11, has meanwhile taken over a high-lucrative consulting position at the German Bank, so this bank, that is controlling Alex Brown“.( Eric Laurent, S.68)
The suspicion having got insider informations about an imminent terror attack is also hardened by the fact, that „2,5 million dollars of speculation gains, that were executed before 9/11 with shares of United Airlines are not yet demanded“. ( Eric Lauren S.61) Without indication to any person at this point it should be mentioned: Anybody had got here cold feet!
Conclusio: If the number three of the CIA Buzzy Krongard knows something about the insider dealings, then the number one Georg Tenet should also be informed about that. This is a superficial reflection of the imminent terror attack. If Tenet was really informed about the insider dealings before 9/11, we have to go deaper, because he tried to convince Bush and Rice, that a terror attack with airplanes used as weapons was imminent. But what can he do if the government does not react? Can only the President elevate the security level? Exactly the opposite happened like I explained already before on this site. It was Tenet who decided to pass Bush on 08/06/2001 a warning of the british secret service in form of a presidential briefing (PDB) to Georg W.Bush onto his ranch in Crawford Texas. Content of the warning was, that „the United States have to be aware of several hijackings of aircrafts by groups of Al-Qaida“. The headline of the PDB was running: „Bin Laden determined to hit within the United States“(Eric Laurent S.94)
In 2004 Tenet stated under oath in front of the 9/11 commission, that „he did neither see nor speak to Bush in august 2001“. This is a false statement! Because 3 years later he writes in his own book, that he had seeked Bush out in august 2001. „Some time after Tenet´s distressing statement in front of the 9/11 commision the CIA declared, Tenet had met Bush in august 2001 two times: Once on his ranch on august 17th (about two weeks after the memo dated on 08/06) and the second time in Washington on august 31th“. ( Vincent Bugliosi, Anklage wegen Mordes gegen Georg W.Bush, S.328)
When Tenet is really innocent, why did he give a wrong statement? To protect Bush only because he is his friend? Krongard should have to inform Tenet immediately about the suspicious insider dealings with the shares of United Airlines and American Airlines. All lights should have blinked red.
It is very astonishing: The secret services all over the world seem to be aware of the danger of an imminent terror attack. Also the chief of terror Defense in the White House Richard Clarke is indicating to an imminent terror attack. But the Bush administration does not react. When Condoleeza Rice takes over the control of the National Security Council, she downgrades Clarke and puts him cold. ( Laurent S.97). The White House tries to avoid that Condoleeza Rice has to appear at the the 9/11 committee to make a statement about her role before 9/11. But on 03/30/2004 the White House accepted the public demand and allowed her statement. I remember very well, that she was stammering while she looked up to the court and had to answer the questions. She told them that the warnings had not been detailed enough to react. I hope that it will not be the last time that she had to appear on a court. She was lying.
George Tenet, CIA Direktor von 1997 bis 2004, ich denke heute dass er mehr oder weniger unschuldig ist !!
Bildquelle rechte Seite : http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Scheich_Mohammed Public Domain Chalid Scheich Mohammed is supposed to be the mastermind of the 9/11 terror attacks. To remember: Cahlid (or Khalid) Scheich Mohammed is at the same time the uncle of Ramzi Jussef, the wirepuller of the attacks onto the World Trade Center of 1993. (Eric Laurent S.237)
If the terror attacks had been planned and executed by some insiders of the government, what I believe after thousands of hours of investigation for this homepage, we should now deepen the way of thinking around the corner: We all know, that the secret services have desinformation departments, aiming to spread false informations. The addressees should fall for their line. (Compare terror attack onto the Discothek LaBelle in Berlin, the trick with the electronic radio-reflex-device, the mossad agent Victor Ostrowsky was involved in the operation) I think it is possible, that this is also the solutions for 9/11. It was planned from the beginning on to make islamic fundamentalists responsible for the attacks. Adequate radio messages have been sent off to underline this theory. The secret services of the world should heard them and ran the warnings forward to the CIA. Bush or let us say better Rumsfeld and Cheney were happy about the work of their secret services NSA and CIA, but in secret he laughed up his sleeve because the CIA did not know, where the terrorists would hit the United States. They at least did know, that this was a part of the plan which now seemed to work well. Correspondingly getting sharp onto the bad islamic terrorists who allegedly hijacked 4 airplanes, it was after 9/11 easy to join the public in a military proceeding against the Taliban in Afghanistan and against Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Because also the work of the tecnical secret service NSA was very efficient by filtering out all these threats and these threats were let out in reality by DIA-agents. And later the US government got confrontated with the criticism that they did not react appropriate to the threats. I believe that the US-Administration ignored the warnings consciously, because nobody should thwart the plan. But these attacks were not executed by islamic fundamentalists but by the government of the United States itsself. The warnings had been a part of the gamesmanship. The bearer of the warnings like Tenet were only the marionets, who were not conscious of their roles. But can´t we put this past to Georg Tenet to play this role consciously? Was he aware to play a role because he could not do anything else than to run the warnings forward to the president not to get later under suspicion of cognisance? I do not believe that. What for an enourmous disgrace is now linked with the CIA and with the name Georg Tenet! (Statement Tenet on 9/11:“If this had been them then grace us God“! He meant the pilots of the flight schools) tranlation propably incorrect but the sense is the same.
Was Tenet informed about the plan? In the morning of 9/11 Tenet sat together with Senator Boren in a restaurant nearby the White House when he got informed about the terror attacks. "Tenet made several telephone calls and finally said to Senator Boren: You know, this is without any doubt the signature of Bin Laden". ( Translation german -english perhaps incorrect) But at this point I have to admit, that I also thought of Bin Laden in the first moment when I got the information that a second airplane had hit the building. I was working in the company on 9/11.
„Richard Clarke, the chief of the Terror Defense gives..... a description of the events and is reporting of a telephone call with the CIA-director: “Georg Tenet was the next in the row. He did not leave any doubt of his suspicion, that Al-Qaida had committed these outrages and he had already spoken with important collegues all over the world and talekd to allies for a counterstrike“.“ ( Eric Laurent, S.182)
And what was the reaction of the president? „Subsequently Clarke is reporting about the first emergency meeting some hours later with the american president: „I wish, that You understand, that we are in war and we will remain in war, until the case is accomplished. All other things are unimportant. All budgets for warfare are getting supplied“. ( Eric Laurent, S.182)
I have to admit at this point, that I also thought of Osama bin Laden in the first moment when I got the information about the terror attacks. Most of us are reading newspapers and everybody knows that Bin Laden was not an unwritten piece of paper already before 9/11.
But I am convinced: CIA is not = CIA, DIA is not = CIA, we have to analyze all persons separately. The airplanes were controlled from outside the cockpit by a small minority of agents and a small group of insiders and perhaps a small group of persons who got wind of the criminal intention of the government could only look at that what happened with bonded hands. They were only insiders without any power. Most of the people within the CIA were tricked and believe until now that islamic fundamentalists stood behind the terror attack if they were not able to think around the corner and if it is not their job to think farer than it is allowed to them. They do not realize until now that it was an intrigue of the Government of the United States. Even young and intelligent citizens of New York are up to this day convinced that it had been islamic fundamentalists who were standing behind the terror attack. But when I asked a couple in Italy who lived in NY City I wondered afterwards about their reaction. I had the feeling that they were frozen to ice in the first moment of my question. It was a couple and the girl starred like having fear in this moment. They have fear of what? Another testimony told very open what she had seen. She had realized massive explosions coming from WTC. Why is it not possible to open the eyes of all people all over the world about that what really happened. The official story is not true, but I think that I am quite close to the truth. I do not say that this what I wrote here is the truth. But it is the right way. The people of this world are not too stupid to realize the truth, but they need to have an open mind, they may not close their eyes in consideration of the fact, that nothing fits together in the official story. The truth can be very cruel and the people are sometimes too busy with their own routine. Who can resent them, that they do not want to deal with questions, they are not able to take on any influence?
One of the reasons that I got convinced that we have to distinguish between the roles of the persons and organisations is the following sentence: „Usually one should assume, that persons would avoid to make attentive onto themselves and therefore in the end to get under suspicion of murder and treason. Maybe members of the american apparatus were lead into a pitfall, to dispose the interest of the public as much as the law enforcement agency onto the persons heading the CIA with the purpose to hide the actual trace to the delinquent“. (Andreas von Bülow, Die CIA und der 11. September, S.64)
And also: Disburdening for Krongard could get the fact, that he admitted in his function as CIA-responsible the filtering of treasonable trading activities, the transmission of the informations about insider dealings about US-Treasuries to the public.
One shadow is falling also onto the NSA ( National Security Agency): „The telephone recordings of the NSA, refering to activities of insider traders, were deleted by the legal department against heavy protest“. ( Andreas von Bülow, S.63)
Which person within the Bush government gave the order to the legal department to delete these evidences? The CIA had lost its power. The power of the CIA had been reduced calculated already in the time before 9/11. Rumsfeld´s DIA was the most powerful secret service on 9/11 and therefore we have to search for the responsibilities for 9/11 within the Pentagon. Bush or Cheney or Rumsfeld could have given the order to delete it. That´s it!
Khalid Sheich Mohammed, Die Ermittler sehen in ihm den Chefplaner der Anschläge des 11.September 2001. Sein Neffe Ramsi Jussef hatte sechs Jahre zuvor bereits versucht, das WTC mit einem in der Tiefgarage abgestellten LKW, der mit Sprengstoff beladen war, zu zerstören. Die Idee der Schulung von Piloten, die Flugzeuge in Gebäude stürzen lassen sollten, stammt von ihm ( S. 295 Lawrence Wright ).......Der SPIEGEL schreibt in seiner Ausgabe 26/09, dass die speziellen Verhörtechniken der Amerikaner zu zahlreichen Falschaussagen von Gefangenen geführt hätten. Aus jetzt freigegebenen Dokumenten geht hervor, Chalid Scheich Mohammed einfach Geschichten erfunden haben soll. "Als man ihn nach dem Aufenthaltsort von al-Qaida Chef Osama bin Laden fragte, habe er geantwortet, dazu wisse er nichts. Dann habe man ihn gefoltert," daraufhin habe ich dann gesagt, er ist in dieser Gegend. Er habe auch Leute , die er gar nicht kenne, als al-Qaida Mitglieder bezeichnet, um der Folter zu entgehen...."( Aus Abschriften von Anhörungen, die vor Militärtribunalen in Guantanamo im Jahre 2007 stattfanden.
