1) Shortly after Sept. 11, Newsweek reported that before 9/11, the Bush Administration initiated a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) Court surveillance/tap of "up to 20" suspected al-Qaeda-linked terrorists" then in the U.S., but that then FISA Court Chief Justice Royce Lamberth subsequently ordered the then-already-ongoing surveillance stopped. This can only mean one thing—that the Bush Justice Dept./FBI/NSA had initiated the tap before asking the FISA Court for a warrant for it, as with the now-famous post-9/11 NSA taps initiated by the Bush Administration without first applying for FISA warrants.

 

As "up to 20" is a clever way of saying "19" without making the link to 9/11 explicit, the Bush Administration Justice Dept/FBI/NSA almost certainly initiated surveillance of all 19, or close to all 19, of the soon-to-be 9/11 hijackers before 9/11. Though Judge Lamberth ordered the surveillance ended once the Administration filed the formal warrant application, there is evidence that the Bush Administration ignored his order to cease the tap and continued the surveillance of the 9/11 hijackers up to and including the day of 9/11.

 

Zacharias Moussaoui—the only person indicted by the Bush Administration for anything even related to
9/11—has stated in court filings that both he "and my (al-Qaeda) brothers" then in the U.S. were surveilled by the Bush Administration before 9/11 and that the Bush Administration knows he can prove it. How could this be the case? If Moussaoui was one of the "up to 20" al-Qaeda-linked terrorist suspects surveilled before 9/11 without an advance FISA warrant as reported by Newsweek, then Moussaoui was also one of the "up to 20" whose taps Judge Lamberth had ordered stopped. Moussaoui, after all, was originally named as the "20th hijacker" of the 9/11 plot. Amazingly, the FISA Act requires that, if the FISA Court rejects a surveillance initiated before a warrant has been applied for, as in this case, the court has to inform the “target” of the surveillance and give him the government's stated reason in the surveillance application for the tap. Moussaoui says that he can "prove" the Bush Administration/FBI initiated surveillance on him before 9/11 because, it can be deduced, the FISA Court itself told him so after Lambergh ordered his – and those of the other “up to 20” – surveillance ended.

 

If this is the case, it opens the very real possibility that the FISA Court likewise informed most or all 19 of the "up to 20" 9/11 hijackers before 9/11 that they were being surveilled by the Bush Administration—and the reason for such surveillance. This also throws new light on the claims by the Pentagon's then-secret data mining task force, “Able Danger,” to have tracked lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta and at least four of the other 19 hijackers beginning in January, 2000, when Atta actually did enter the country according to Daniel Hopsicker in his book, Welcome to Terrorland. The FBI falsely claimed, and still falsely claims, that Atta did not enter the U.S. until the summer of 2000, six months later. The likely reason for this intentional lie about when Atta first entered the country is what Atta is known to have done while inside the U.S. between January and the Summer of 2000. Hopsicker reveals that, among other activities, Atta visited Portland, Maine, in March, 2000, and perhaps even earlier. An abiding “mystery” of the official cover story is why would Atta drive to Portland, Maine, on Sept. 10, the day before 9/11, then fly from Portland to Boston early on the morning of Sept. 11. The answer to this “mystery,” which the FBI clearly already knows, is the link between what Atta was doing in Portland, before the administration wants to admit he was in the country as well as what he was doing there the day before 9/11 and early on the morning of 9/11. This all may have something to do with the fact that special—and sometimes secret— CIA flights are run out of an airport in Portland, Maine.12

2) The FBI's top bin Laden/al-Qaeda hunter until shortly before 9/11, John O'Neill, "happened" to be at the same hotel in the same town near Tarragona, Spain in mid-July 2001 just before lead hijacker Mohammed Atta and 9/11 plot “coordinator" Ramzi Binalshibh met there for what the Kean Commission calls the “final 9/11 planning meeting.” (Some Bush Administration officials now also believe that 9/11 “mastermind” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) was at this critical meeting as well.) This cannot be—and is not—a coincidence. O'Neill, who was in close contact with German intelligence—recall that Atta led the "German cell" for the 9/11 attacks— and Spanish intelligence, had clearly been alerted to the upcoming meeting and was at the hotel to surveil/tap/bug the room where the meeting was about to be held. O'Neill and his agency, the Bush Administration’s FBI, thus knew every detail, or almost every detail, of the planned 9/11 plot at least two months in advance.

 

Perhaps as significantly, European media reported that bin Laden was in an American hospital in Dubai for surgery in early July 2001 and would have likely been recuperating and incapacitated there at the time of the “final 9/11 Planning Meeting” in Spain a few days later. Reportedly, bin Laden was also visited in the hospital by the area’s then CIA Station chief. The question naturally arises as to whether bin Laden was telephoned by Atta, Binalshibh, and perhaps also KSM, or visa versa, while the latter were at the “Final 9/11 Planning Meeting” in the hotel that O’Neill had pre-bugged. If so, then O’Neill, the FBI, and the highest levels of the Bush Administration—including O’Neill’s then boss, Attorney General Ashcroft who suddenly stopped flying commercial aircraft about this time—knew not only every detail of the 9/11 plot as of that date, but almost certainly also all the key “outside” conspirators plotting their “final plans” including possibly bin Laden himself, on tape—obviously another “Butterfield” tape to be demanded under subpoena.

3) As noted above, on 9/11 itself the U.S. military was conducting NORAD/Air Force emergency response exercises with scenarios of multiple hijacks and the NRO was conducting an emergency response exercise on the scenario of a plane crashing into one of the towers at its headquarters just outside Washington, D.C.11— many NRO personnel being from the Air Force. It is next to impossible for this to have been the case unless the exercises, also referred to by the 9/11 truth community as war games, were intentionally scripted to mirror what had been learned from the above-mentioned detailed advance intelligence. The purpose of the war games held on 9/11 was to practice how to defend against the very attacks that John O'Neill's Tarragona meeting surveillance, the Pentagon’s “Able Danger” data-mining tracking, and the FBI's FISA-warrant-less surveillance of the "up to 20" ("19"?) suspected al-Qaeda terrorists had already revealed. You don’t practice something in a multi-milliondollar set of exercises that you “can’t imagine.” The date for the actual attacks—Sept. 11—was then chosen to coincide with the Pentagon’s exercises, which in turn mirrored the real attack plans.

 

Perhaps the most burning data point to prove Bush Administration complicity is the fact that lead hijacker Mohammed Atta took to the mid-July “final 9/11 planning meeting” in Spain the information that “the date has been set” (i.e. set by someone else, other than Atta), and that he, Atta, didn’t yet know it, but would “know it” in five to six weeks or by late August, 2001.13 Atta is clearly waiting to learn the date of “his own” attack. This last piece of the puzzle fell into place during the first phase of Zacarias Moussaoui’s sentencing trial. It was found in the 58-page transcript of 9/11”mastermind” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s interrogation “testimony” read into the trial record by the Bush Administration prosecution. In the KSM transcript, it is revealed that bin Laden and KSM “allowed Atta to choose” both the final targets for the attacks and the attack date.”14 From this, therefore, we know that neither bin Laden nor “mastermind” KSM nor “coordinator” Binalshibh set the Sept. 11 attack date. However, from what Atta said to Binalshibh—and probably also KSM and possibly also bin Laden by phone link—at the “Final Planning Meeting” in Spain, we also know that neither did Atta. Atta was waiting to learn the date of his “own” attack, and that date didn’t come from any of his al-Qaeda superiors. It must be the case then that, despite KSM’s claim that he “let” Atta choose the date, none of the top “outside terrorist” conspirators set the date for the Sept. 11 attacks, including Atta.

 

 

Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed, as the head of Pakistan’s military intelligence agency ISI, ordered $100,000 wired to Atta shortly before 9/11. On the morning of 9/11, he was having breakfast with future CIA Director Porter J. Goss and the senator who co-chaired the joint House/Senate 9/11 “investigation” following the attacks. And as Gen. Ahmed was in Washington in the three days leading up to 9/11 meeting with CIA Director George Tenet and top officials at the Pentagon, which was about to conduct the war games, Gen. Ahmed is the top candidate for the “middle man” who was told the date and details of the Pentagon’s emergency response exercises and communicated them, directly or through an intermediary, to Atta. Atta then confirmed the 9/11 date for the war games—which was the date of the attacks—in his now-famous NSA-intercepted phone call with KSM of Sept. 10, in which he related, “The Match is about to begin. Zero hour is tomorrow.” “Match” is a way of saying “test exercise” or “war game.” This intercept almost certainly was made without an advance FISA warrant.

 

One of the abiding “mysteries” of Sept. 11 is why Gen. Eberhart, the commander of NORAD on 9/11, claimed to the 9/11 Commission that on the morning of 9/11 NORAD was conducting, among others, a preplanned “Soviet-era” emergency response exercise15 in which U.S. fighter jets were to defend against Russian nuclear bombers. After all, the Soviet Union had ceased to exist ten years before. He didn’t say “Russian,” he said “Soviet”. This is very strange until one discovers that, despite repeated official and media claims that Sept. 11 was “completely unique” and that the skies over America had “never before” been cleared of all commercial and private civilian aircraft, NORAD had conducted another emergency response exercise 40 years earlier, which completely cleared the skies over the mainland U.S. This was on Oct.
14, 1961, in a war game called “Sky Shield II”, which was based on a scenario of how to defend against an air attack by Soviet bombers on New York City.16 The main difference between the 1961 exercise and Sept. 11 is that the clearing of the skies was announced in advance to the public in “Sky Shield”. This original Soviet-era exercise, which included 1,800 U.S. and 15 Canadian military planes and was billed as “the greatest exercise ever conducted by Western air-defense forces,” is mentioned in the Air Force’s own account of the events of Sept. 11, Air War Over America. In fact, Gen. Larry Arnold, NORAD’s commander for the continental U.S. on 9/11 directly under Eberhart who finally ordered interceptor jets scrambled to belatedly meet the hijack threat, made a point of including the eerily similar1961 Air Force war game in the book. Not only did both the 1961 and Sept. 11 NORAD “Soviet-era” war game scenarios include attacks on New York City; in the 1961 exercise, U.S. military planes played the role of Soviet attack bombers. That is, the U.S. military prescripted both the defense and the “attack” by its own planes pretending to be Soviet aircraft. If Gen. Eberhart’s testimony to the 9/11 Commission is correct, NORAD may have been conducting a “Soviet-era” exercise much like the one in 1961, on 9/11.

 

In this light, it is significant that mainstream press stories contain intriguing reports that point to the possibility that there were two American Airlines “Flight 11” leaving from two different gates at Boston Logan airport within a few minutes of one another on 9/11, as well as emerging evidence of other of the hijacked 9/11 flight numbers possibly being “twinned,”17 or copied. The question naturally arises, were these “twinned” NORAD flights U.S. military planes “playing” hijacked airliner “attackers,” similar to the 1961 scenario except substituting commandeered airliners for Soviet bombers? And could the 9/11 exercise have included a “trigger” event to clear the skies over the mainland U.S. so that a realistic test of U.S. air defenses could be conducted without interference from the thousands of civilian aircraft normally in the air?

 

Key quotes from the New York Times articles during the 1961 NORAD exercise are eerily similar to stories appearing on 9/11 [text in parentheses and italics added]: “It is not so much the fear of collisions with military aircraft that has caused civilian planes to be ordered out of the skies, as it is the knowledge that inadequate [civilian FAA] electronic flight controls will be available during the exercise to guide them. Strategic Air Command (SAC) bombers, playing the role of the marauding forces, will seek to foul communications and radar. They will drop tinsel-like pieces of metal called “chaff” overhead [like the myriad small pieces of metal scrap found on the Pentagon lawn and Shanksville, Pennsylvania “crash” site on 9/11?]…that will throw radarscopes [including the FAA’s] into a confusion of false signals.”; “All the bomber missions were laid out ahead of time and fed into the NORAD computer”; “An automated shorthand running display of the entire battle was provided at NORAD combat center and in similar centers at Strategic Air Command headquarters [where President Bush was taken on 9/11] and in the Pentagon [which was attacked on 9/11]”; “A fight plan for every aircraft [private, commercial and military] is fed into the computer’s memory beforehand. When a plane shows on the radarscope, a console operator picks up an aluminum electronic gun, points it at the blip, and squeezes the trigger. That brings the flight to the computer’s attention. If the flight [plan] is filed in its memory, the computer automatically replies, ‘Yes, I am aware of that [plane].’ It does this by marking the flight with an F for Friendly. While the computer compares the flight with its memorized data, it marks the flight P for Pending. Finally, it may mark it H for Hostile. ‘We have two minutes to identify a flight [as Friendly] before we scramble [interceptor jets]…to make a visual identification of an uncertain aircraft or to attack it.’; ‘We do not train [in exercises like the 1961 ‘Sky Shield II, or on 9/11] with Hostile symbology [showing on screens]; therefore, the Strategic Air Command’s bombers playing the role of the attacking [Soviet Russian] force [on Oct. 14, 1961] were marked K, for Faker.’”; and “There are seventeen units of Army Air Defense Artillery with ground-to-air anti-aircraft missiles near New York [in 1961; how many more were there on 9/11, 40 years later, when none were used?]” The 1961 war game was directed by then NORAD commander Air Force Gen. Laurence Sherman Kuter from his combat operations center at NORAD’s Colorado Springs headquarters, which in the mid-1960s moved to Cheyenne Mountain, Gen. Eberhart’s command center on 9/11. It may also be significant that the Air Force’s war games simulation center is at Maxwell Air Force Base in Alabama, which Gen. Kuter had earlier commanded and where lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta received training.

 

The Pentagon's "Able Danger" data miners now claim that “Department of Defense lawyers”—almost certainly from the National Security Agency, then headed by Gen. Hayden, of the same service that planned the 9/11 war games, the Air Force—blocked planned meetings with the FBI in which they wanted to tell the FBI that they had "tracked" Atta and others of the 9/11 hijackers prior to 9/11 and ask the FBI to initiate further surveillance on them. The fact that the FBI did initiate exactly such a surveillance of the "up to 20 Al Qaeda linked terrorist suspects" before 9/11 is strong evidence that, despite their current claims to the contrary, the Pentagon’s "Able Danger" team did communicate what they learned from tracking Atta and the others to the FBI before 9/11, and that the FBI then initiated FISA-warrant-less surveillances of Atta and others subsequently ordered stopped by then Chief FISA Court Judge Lamberth—all of this prior to 9/11. The fact that initially-suspected "20th 9/11 hijacker" Moussaoui officially filed claims that he "and my brothers" were surveilled before
9/11 is further evidence that the FBI continued to watch all or most of the 9/11 hijackers right up until the attacks, despite Lamberth's order to cease and desist. FBI Headquarters supervisors David Frasca and his deputy Maltbie refused 70 – seventy – urgent requests by Moussaoui's FBI interrogator and by Coleen Rowley in the Minneapolis FBI office, for either a FISA Court warrant or an “ordinary” criminal warrant to get into Moussaoui’s computer and surveil anyone mentioned therein. Doing so would have clearly stopped the plot, as Moussaoui now claims he personally knew 17—almost all— of the 19 hijackers.18

 

In addition to all the evidence that the idea of plane impacts plus fire causing destruction was a carefully planned cover story for the collapse of WTC 1, 2 and 7, as well as for the initial violent event at the Pentagon, the other overwhelming line of evidence for 9/11 as an “Inside Job” are the anthrax attacks.

 

Any evidence linking 9/11 to the anthrax letters—dated Sept. 11 but sent in mid- October and only to Democratic leaders in Congress—no Republicans—is direct evidence of an inside job because that particular type of anthrax is known to have been of the highly controlled “Ames strain” developed by the U.S. Army at Ft. Dietrick, Maryland, and at the University of Iowa in Ames, Iowa. It was also high-spore-count, military-grade weaponized anthrax refined according to a trade secret held reportedly held by William Patrick, former Ft. Detrick bioweapons expert, mentor of Steven Hatfill, the only “person of interest” stalked by the FBI as a suspect in the still “unsolved” anthrax case, and the close friend and colleague of Bush Administration bio-counterterrorism expert Jerry Hauer, a signer of the PNAC manifesto calling for “a new Pearl Harbor.”

 

On Sept. 11, this same Jerry Hauer personally delivered anti-anthrax Cipro to Vice President Cheney’s staff at the White House. Why? The conservative legal watchdog group Judicial Watch has filed a suit against Vice President Cheney and other Bush Administration officials demanding to know why Cipro was delivered to the executive mansion – and only to the executive mansion—on the day of the attacks. So far the response has been a deafening silence. On Sept. 10, the day before 9/11, FEMA and other emergency response personnel arrived in New York City for a counterbioterrorism exercise called “Tripod II” claimed by the Bush Administration to have been scheduled to begin Sept. 12. There is reason to believe that the bio-agent this drill was to practice defending against was anthrax, as Jerry Hauer was also a major planner of the New York City exercise. And there is also a strong possibility the true start date for the exercise was Sept. 11, as so many personnel were already in place on Sept. 10. As the Air Force’s war game scenario had just “come to life” in real attacks on 9/11, were Hauer and Cheney worried that the same thing might be about to happen with their counter-bioterrorism “exercise” Tripod II? Is this why the anti-anthrax drug Cipro was distributed to the White House, “just in case”? If so, it would be strong evidence that Tripod II was on the scenario of defending New York City against an anthrax attack. Was the “vector,” or delivery vehicle, for that emergency response exercise scenario anthrax attack to have been by air via airplane?

 

Notably, in their book on bioterrorism, Germs, Judith Miller and William Broad claim, apparently from inside sources, that Ramzi Yousef’s plans for the first World Trade Center attack in 1993 included explosively pushing large quantities of cyanide out into New York City. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the “mastermind” of 9/11, is Ramzi Yousef’s uncle. Finally, former New York City mayor Rudolf Giuliani testified to the 9/11 Commission that when WTC 7, which held his emergency operations center, collapsed on 9/11, he moved those operations to the command and control center set up on Pier 92 for the “Tripod II” bio-terrorism exercise and that it even worked better than the original. Giuliani told the
9/11 Commission, “The reason Pier 92 was selected as a command center was because on the next day, on September 12, Pier 92 was going to have a drill. It had hundreds of people there—from FEMA, from the Federal Government, from the State [Dept.], from the [New York] State Emergency Management Office—and they were getting ready for a drill for biochemical attack. So that was going be the place they were going to have the drill. The equipment was already there, so we were able to establish a command center there that was two and a half to three times bigger than the command center that we had lost at 7 World Trade Center. And it was from there that the rest of the search and rescue effort was completed."

 

 

The U.S. military, not al-Qaeda, had the access to plant explosives inside its own most heavily defended world headquarters, the Pentagon. The U.S. military, not al- Qaeda, had the access to plant the explosives Willy Rodriquez heard and felt go off deep in the sub-basement of the World Trade Center. The U.S. military, not al-Qaeda, had the sustained access weeks before 9/11 to plant controlled demolition charges throughout the superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC2, and in WTC 7, which brought down all three buildings on 9/11. The U.S. military, not al-Qaeda, had access to the sulfurenhanced military-grade thermite detected in the sub-basement levels of the WTC needed to melt the steel found molten there weeks later. The U.S. military, not al-Qaeda, would have chosen the least populated and most reinforced section of the Pentagon – its newly upgraded west wedge—to target in a strike, minimizing casualties. Real terrorists would have maximized them. A U.S. military plane, not one piloted by al-Qaeda, performed the highly skilled, high-speed 270-degree dive towards the Pentagon that Air Traffic Controllers on 9/11 were sure was a military plane as they watched it on their screens. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane flown by al-Qaeda, would have given off the “friendly” signal needed to disable the Pentagon’s anti-aircraft missile batteries as it approached the building. Only the U.S. military, not al-Qaeda, had the ability to break all of its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own emergency response system. Real terrorist hijackers would never have chosen routes back to their intended targets that flew over or near military bases, which the 9/11 planes did. Only the U.S. military, not al-Qaeda, would have access to the weaponized, military-grade U.S. Army “Ames strain’ anthrax contained in letters mailed only to Democratic Congressional leaders. It is absurd to believe al-Qaeda would target only Democrats, especially as the U.S. leadership at the time of 9/11 was Republican. After receiving the anthrax letter dated Sept. 11, then Senate Democratic leader Thomas Daschle was calling for a Congressional investigation of 9/11 and had already been warned off from “looking too closely at” 9/11 by President Bush and Vice President Cheney. When he received his anthrax letter, another Democratic leader, Senator Patrick Leahy, was leading the Congressional resistance to the Patriot Act, the assault on Americans’ privacy and civil liberties justified by “Al Qaeda’s” attack, clearly drafted by the Bush Administration before 9/11 and “in the can” awaiting its “trigger event”.

 

 

First and foremost are the signers of the pre-9/11 Project for a New American Century (PNAC) manifesto calling for “a new Pearl Harbor” to catalyze its global domination agenda, including Vice President Dick Cheney; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who was on the White House Clarke teleconference from the outset but whom no one could allegedly locate until 10:30 on 9/11; then Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz; Richard Perle, then head of Secretary Rumsfeld’s Defense Policy Board; Jerry Hauer, just-former top emergency response official for New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani and the federal government’s top bio-terrorism expert who personally took anti-anthrax Cipro to the White House on 9/11; then National Security Council Middle East adviser Zalmay Khalizad, soon to be the first U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan after 9/11 and now U.S. Ambassador to Iraq—the two countries whose invasions were rationalized as retaliation for the attacks of 9/11 -- during the Cold War, Khalizad was a liaison to then CIA “bag man” Osama bin Laden in the CIA’s covert war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, the crucible from which al-Qaeda emerged); and Jeb Bush, governor of Florida and President Bush’s brother, who just before 9/11 added “terrorist attack” to the list of triggers for declaring martial law in the state, where President Bush was Sept. 10 and Sept. 11.

 

Yet another is the U.S. military agency, probably Army or Joint Special Operations, that preplaced the military-grade sulfur-enhanced thermite throughout WTC 1, WTC 2 and WTC 7 well before the 9/11 “terrorist” attacks, with special attention reserved for Army Gen. William G. (Jerry) Boykin, the radical Christian fundamentalist former commander of the Army’s elite commando Delta Force, recently proposed to head the Army’s Special Operations Command. Also the Pentagon’s POP2 office, reported to plan and script “false flag” operations, attacks staged by the military but made to appear perpetrated by an outside enemy to justify U.S. military “retaliation”. Yet another suspect is Defense Intelligence Agency Iran expert Lawrence “Larry” Franklin, on loan to Perle and Wolfowitz’s neo-con cabal partner Douglas Feith Before and on 9/11 and arrested for passing national security secrets on Iran to Israeli operatives at the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Scrutiny should also be given to the scriptwriters for NORAD’s and NRO’s emergency response exercises planned for and held on 9/11, especially members of the drills’ “White Teams” who set the content in advance and then oversee both “Red Team attackers” and “Blue Team defenders” on the actual day of the exercise. (Larry Franklin was also, and may still be, an officer in the Air Force reserves, which oversaw the NORAD “Vigilant Guardian/Vigilant Warrior” wargame exercises on 9/11). Among these high level scriptwriters almost certainly is John Fulton, head of Strategic Gaming at NRO before and on 9/11 who devised that agency’s plane-crashing-into-tower emergency response drill on the morning of 9/11. Also every one of the as-yet-to-be-identified “top Pentagon officials” who on the day before 9/11, Sept. 10, according to Newsweek, suddenly cancelled their then-already-booked flights for Sept. 1119 -- not coincidentally the same day, Sept. 10, that the NSA intercepted Atta’s “Zero hour is tomorrow” call with 9/11 ‘Mastermind’ Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. These “top Pentagon officials” may well include National Military Command Center (NMCC) commander Brig. Gen. Montague Winfield who, again on that same day Sept. 10, asked his deputy, Navy Capt. Charles Leidig, to take over for him just the next morning between 8:30 and 10:30 -- precisely the two hours of Sept. 11 ‘war games’.

 

Yet another key suspect is Michael Chertoff, U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey during the first
1993 attack on the World Trade Center who, as a private attorney, had represented Egyptian-born U.S. resident Magdy Elamir, under investigation for illegally diverting millions of dollars from a medical business and whose brother, Mohammed Elamir (also spelled El Amir), funded arms smugglers with links to Al Qaeda.20 The two Egyptian brothers El Amir also figured prominently in a 9/11 precursor operation, “Operation Diamondback”. So is it only a coincidence that lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta’s name in his native country, also Egypt, was also Mohammed El Amir? That is, had Chertoff, put in charge of “investigating” Atta’s attack immediately after, legally represented one of Atta’s relatives? After the attacks, President Bush almost instantly put Chertoff in charge of the entire 9/11 “investigation”, and he is now Director of Homeland Security -- the top official charged with protecting the U.S. mainland from attacks by . . . “Al Qaeda”.

 

Another key suspect is Air Force General William Hayden, before and on 9/11 head of the National Security Agency (NSA), which tapped the calls of lead hijacker Mohammed Atta and 9/11 “Mastermind” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed the day before 9/11, and surely on many other occasions before 9/11 as well— all almost certainly without the FISA warrants required by law. (Even the single pre-9/11 Sept. 10 warrantless NSA tap puts the lie to President Bush’s claim that he initiated warrant-less NSA taps of al-Qaeda suspects because of—that is, only after—9/11. Hayden was then made deputy director of Homeland Security, immediately under . . . Michael Chertoff.

 

At FBI headquarters are key suspects David Frasca and his deputy Michael Maltbie, who ignored
70 pleas by Zacarias Moussaoui’s interrogator to aggressively investigate the contents of Moussaoui’s computer before 9/11. And in New York, there is then New York City Mayor Rudolph Giulinani, who completely evacuated WTC 7, where his Emergency Operations Center was located, when told – ahead of time – that the WTC was going to come down. Jerry Hauer, who personally took anti-anthrax Cipro to the White House on 9/11, had been the head of Giuliani’s emergency responders.

 

Attention should also be directed to Phillip Zelikow, before and on 9/11 NSC adviser, along with PNAC manifesto signer Zalmay Khalizad, to then NSC Adviser Condolezza Rice. Zelikow orchestrated both the 9/11 Kean Commission Report cover up of the Administration’s inside job and, at Rice’s request, rewrote the Bush Administration’s official 2002 national strategic plan to match the global domination agenda of the pre-9/11 PNAC manifesto.

 

And there is Larry Silverstein, lease holder of the WTC complex buildings including Towers 1 and 2 brought down by controlled demolition using pre-placed explosives on 9/11, and outright owner of WTC 7 which also came down by controlled demolition on 9/11 though not hit by any plane. Just before 9/11, John O’Neill, who had obviously pre-alerted Silverstein to the plot to attack both WTC 1 and WTC 2 based on the surveillance from the mid-July ‘final 9/11 planning meeting’ in Spain, was made chief of security for the WTC just before 9.11, personally arranged by PNAC manifesto signer Jerry Hauer. Silverstein then “happened” to try to add a rider to his insurance policy on the WTC complex so that twin terrorist attacks would result in a doubled claims pay out.

 

And there is the mysterious “Agency” – apparently a reference to a U.S. Government agency – which the Kean Commission report revealed, without identifying by name, made 90 percent or so of the suspicious puts on United and American Airlines, Boeing, and Morgan Stanley Dean Witter (which had the largest number of floors in the WTC towers which collapsed) shortly before 9/11. The most likely candidate for this “Agency” is the CIA, often referred to as just “the Agency.” By law, it should be recalled, the CIA is the personal “agency” of the President. On 9/11, this was George W. Bush, who said “It looks like I hit the Trifecta!”