I believe it is very important that Village Voice deals with the simple and basic questions around 911. By doing this it is assured that every reader can follow and moreover that every reader can easily see that there is something rotten in the state of 911.
Before starting with 911 here is one questions I always wanted to ask:
- On September 10, 2001 Rumsfeld acknowledges : “According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions.” And declares not the War on Terrorism but on Bureaucracy.
Does one know today where the money is? (As I’m very bad in maths I had to calculate with all theses zeros: it makes $8000 for every US citizen ….)
- Why are there no official flight manifests? How come that the number of victims in the airplanes still varies? How come that people never even thinking of taking a flight that day found themselves on the list of victims? How come that the Bukhari brothers found themselves as terrorists who had been on the flights (CNN excused itself). Well one brother was dead already … The other one still in (of course) Florida.
- How come that there are no boarding cards? No fingerprints etc?
- How come that there is absolutely no video footage of terrorists entering their plane? (The footage over and over shown of Atta and Al-Omari is from Portland airport where they took the flight to Boston so not actually the one they are supposed to hijack).
- How come that only of Flight 11 the seat numbers of the hijackers are given (and in all accounts they vary even in the two phone calls of Ong and Sweeney). How come that we don’t have the seat numbers of Flight 77 and 175. For Flight 93 obviously only Jere Longman (NYT journalist and author of “Among the Heroes”) had access to the seat numbers. But even him often mentiones not the precise seat number.
- How come that all passengers in Flight 93 only see three instead of four terrorists? How come that also in Flight 11 Ong and Sweeney (the flight stewardesses) despite the he differences in their accounts speak only of four and not five hijackers? (Calls from the other two flights make no statements concerning the number of hijackers). Jumpseating (a pîlot from the same airline who doesn’t find a seat in the airplane anymore is offered a seat in the cockpit) is not a possibility as it was often suggested. All planes very at least half empty. Moreover according to Jere Longman (NYT journalists and author of “Among the Heroes”) in that case the pilot had to hand in a letter asking officially for permission. No such letter is known to have been made.
- At first the talk was only of 18 hijackers then Hani Hanjour (pilot of Flight 77) was added. According to WP his "name was not on the American Airlines manifest for [Flight 77] because he may not have had a ticket."
- How come that the terrorists onboard Flight 77 and 93 never have been properly identified by their DNA? According to the official statements they were simply identified as being the terrorists by “elimination”. They all were named “John Doe” on their death certificat.
- So conclusively based on which proofs is officially assumed that the 19 hijackers were actually onboard of the four planes?? And which court would accept this lack of proofs?
- The FBI itself admitted that the identities of the hijackers might not be known for certain. Nonetheless it didn’t change its list of September 27 although there was several articles hinting at the possibility that the hijackers had stolen identities of people actually being still a live. So based on which proofs did the FBI assume that their list is correct?
- Right after 911 there were different accounts stating that at least five hijackers had received military formation at US military schools. The story was dropped after the Pentagon declared the people at the schools were “probably” not the same as the hijackers http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2001/09/16reconstructingt.html
. I agree with Daniel Hopsicker that the word “probably” is not really convincing and not appropriate talking about 911. So the question still stands: Did some hijackers receive their military formation in the US? And if this is the case based on which connections or for which reasons had they been accepted?
- Daniel Hopsicker presents in his book “Welcome to Terrorland” tonnes of proofs that Mohammed Atta & Co. stayed far longer in Venice, Florida as officially stated by the FBI. Why is Venice omitted? Why is there no journalist investigation concerning this city that attracted 3 of 4 pilots? Why does Village Voice not ask to see all the documents the FBI took away from the flight schools of Rudi Dekker and Arne Kruithof? Again documents that have never been presented to the public?
Concerning the actual flights:
- Why were the black box of Flight 11 and 175 never found although the firm Convar managed to restore almost 100% of the data on the hard disks that were found in the rubble of the WTC [Reuteres, 12/19/01]?
- Why is the black box of Flight 77 not published although it would easily silence all conspiracy nuts claiming that no Boeing crashed into the Pentagon?
- Why is the black box of Flight 93 not published (only after one year of struggle family members were allowed to listen but not to record)?
- Why was the discrepancy between the official crash time of Flight 93 (10:03) and the seismic analysis stating that it was at 10:06:05 never explained?
As the black box of Flight 93 ends at 10:02 it implies that there is quite a lot missing?
- Why are the recordings of radar on 911 not published?
- Why are the recordings of the conversations between the tower and the hijacked flights not published?
- Why are none of the transcripts of theses conversations complete? Flight 93 is missing completely.
- Why are flight controllers not allowed to talk to the press?
- Why are the Flights 11 and 77 not mentioned on the Board of Transportation (although they are always mentioned the days before)?
- Did Flight 11 take off from it’s usual gate 26 or as reported almost everywhere from gate 32? The implication of this seemingly unimportant question: http://www.globalfreepress.com/article.pl?sid=04/03/14/212247
- How is it to be explained that until today we don’t have the exact times when fighters took off to chase the hijacked airplanes? Why all this discrepancy? Was there indeed a stand down order? http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/analysis/norad/docs/intercept_proc.pdf
Further general questions:
- The behaviour of the President received surprisingly little media coverage. When was he told of the first attack? It is believable that he was not informed before arriving at the Booker Elementary School although others in his caravan and the press was already informed? Who finally told him after he arrived (media accounts give three different names)? When did President Bush got the info of the second attack? Was it Andy Card who told him (as widely reported) or did the President see the attack on the TV before entering the classroom (twice he stressed the fact himself that the saw it on the TV this morning. But the first attack wasn’t shown live) If he saw it on the TV why did he enter the classroom nonetheless? And in any case why did no Secret Service member whisk him off?
- According to two local media reports there might have been an attempt to kill President Bush on the morning of 911. Why then was he not protected at his speech at 9:30 nor when he entered Air Force One nor was this airplane protected for 90 minutes although being in an airplane wasn’t really safe this morning?
- Donald Rumsfeld behaviour on the morning of 911 should also be a focus of attention. After he was told of the first attack and his assistant rushed to the National Military Command Center he stayed. He either had to do some phone calls, continued to discuss the defense budged or got his CIA briefings (as usual the accounts differ). But in any case he only arrived at the NMCC at 10:30. Being the head of the defense this lack of urgency should be further investigated. http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/cnn090402.html
- The New York Times tried to figure out who was responsible for the decision to remove and recycle the steel of the WTC. But officials always refused to answer. http://www.wanttoknow.info/011225nytimes
So let’s put this question again. Who was in charge of ordering the destruction of evidence?
- “Almost lost in the chaos of the collapse of the World Trade Center's twin towers is a mystery that under normal circumstances would probably have captured the attention of the world: the collapse of a nearby 47-story building, seven hours after flaming debris from the towers rained down on it, igniting what became an out-of-control fire.” [New York Times, 11/29/01]. Why is the access to the WTC 7 prohibited still today?
- Why does no media report (save http://www.intellnet.org/news/2002/05/24/9488-1.html
) talk about the Pentagon drill in October 2000? (http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2000/mdwnewsservice110300.html)
Taking into consideration that also the medical service of the Pentagon trained in Mai 2001 for the emergency case of an airplane crashing into the Pentagon (http://www.usmedicine.com/article.cfm?articleID=272&issueID=31) isn’t it ridiculous that the Joint Chieffs declared a war game of multiple hijacking and one airplane crashing into the Pentagon “as unrealistic”? http://www.pogo.org/m/hsp/planesasmissiles.pdf
- President Bush vowed to find Ussama bin Ladin dead or alive. Then he declared he considers his importance overestimated. There are lots of reports from the UK that the hunt for UBL was more of a farce. Given the fact that this had been the reason for going to war against Afghanistan shouldn’t this be part of a journalist investigation? http://11september-paxamericana.chez.tiscali.fr//Laden.htm
- Recently the White House admitted to have allowed bin Ladin family members and members of the royal Saud family to leave the US although there was an air ban. This is against all standard procedures in murder cases. Who gave this order?
- Greg Palast reported that President Bush prevented FBI investigation into the bin Ladin family before 911? http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4293682,00.html
- Why is bin Ladin not officially wanted by the FBI for 911?
- What happened to the investigation into the five murders committed with Anthrax? Has the media silence anything to do with the fact that it is proven that the Anthrax stems from USAMRIID? http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=complete_911_timeline_anthrax_attacks
- Is the Guardian correct stating “Several prominent scientists have suggested that the FBI's investigation is being pursued with less than the rigour we might have expected because the federal authorities have something to hide. The FBI has dismissed them as conspiracy theorists. But there is surely a point after which incompetence becomes an insufficient explanation for failure.” http://www.guardian.co.uk/anthrax/story/0,1520,719367,00.html
Well, this is by far not all but a lot to start with.