Nicholson Was Right (about 9/11), Wasn't He?

[Michael]

There’s a famous line in a film entitled “A Few Good Men”. In the film, Jack Nicholson plays a marine corps colonel who knows that the military is closing in on a ritual carried out by marines that leads to the death of one marine.

Speaking to the navy attorney, played by Tom Cruise, who is in charge of investigating the marine’s death, Nicholson speaks the famous words, “You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth!”

Although I’m certain that most Americans, lead by their milquetoast media, fall into the category of people who “can’t handle the truth”, I can’t just sit back and allow the truth to slip by anyone who will read or listen.

I belong to a group called the Mount Diablo Peace Center.

The Mount Diablo Peace Center mostly informs its members of upcoming events in which they think the members will be interested.

Some time ago, MtDPC informed its members that author David Ray Griffin, author of “The New Pearl Harbor; Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11” and “The 9/11 Commission Report; Omissions and Distortions”, would appear on CPAN on April 30, 2005.

He did, indeed, appear and I watched him. He lectured on a possible explanation for what should be, no matter what explanation is proven true, the greatest crime carried out against America and Americans in the history of The United States.

On September 11, 2001, a heinous crime was committed. That crime saw the deaths of over 2,000 people and it happened in the former United States of America. There is a ridiculous “conspiracy theory” that tries to explain how and why this crime happened.

The ridiculous theory is that 19 Middle Eastern men hijacked four American airliners, United Airlines Flight #93, American Airlines Flight #77, American Airlines Flight #11 and United Airlines Flight #175, and crashed two of them into the World Trade Center and one of them into The Pentagon (Flight #93 crashed into a field in Pennsylvania after passengers gained control of it).

The reason given by the Bush administration for this catastrophe was that the hijackers hated Americans for their freedom.

Since a conspiracy is defined as, among other things, “an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action” and a theory is defined as, among other things, a “systematically organized body of knowledge applicable in a relatively wide variety of circumstances, especially a system of assumptions, accepted principles, and rules of procedure devised to analyze, predict, or otherwise explain the nature or behavior of a specified set of phenomena” and “abstract reasoning; speculation”, we can’t dismiss the above theory, as implausible as it may seem. After all, taken the given definitions, police solve crimes based upon conspiracy theories or theories of conspiracy every day.

In his books, Professor Griffin puts forth his own theory. The explanation(s) of Griffin’s theory are much more plausible and testable than the explanations given by the Bush administration.

The other, more important thing about Griffin’s theory is that it implicates the US Government in the planning and implementation of this murderous act.

Some with whom I’ve shared some of this information have expressed extreme doubt about Professor Griffin’s theory and choose to believe the “conspiracy theory” given to the American public by the government of the former United States of America.

I have read “The New Pearl Harbor” and am reading “Omissions and Distortions”. I suggest that you all read these books. I also suggest that you go to his lecture and watch it. It’s frighteningly convincing.

The so called investigations of this crime have come up short, at the behest of the Bush Administration, of looking at every possible aspect of the crime. Consequently, another commission, not chosen by anyone in the administration and only answerable to the American people, should be formed to study the crime. We may find out that a horrible crime was carried out against the American people by its own government.

There is a movement to reopen the 9/11 inquiry. Many people who are part of this movement are people who lost loved ones on that fateful day. Don’t you think that they at least deserve an unhampered investigation, an investigation in which all pertinent documents are made available to the investigators, an investigation in which all people who were involved in any part of that day must testify under oath?

Remember this. There was an x-rated book published on the internet in the 1990’s which anyone of any age could read. This book was written by members of the “Christian Right”. The book is still on the internet and is called “Referral From Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr in Conformity With the Requirements of Title 28, United States Code, Section 595(c)”. This book is filled with graphic sexual references. Yet, the “Christian Right” not only thought that the “message” of the book trumped the contents so much that they would allow “the children” to read it, they thought that the contents and message were enough to spend $50 million of US taxpayer money and to impeach President William Jefferson Clinton.

The crime committed on September 11, 2001 was more harmful to America than what President Clinton did and, no matter who is proven guilty in committing the acts of 9/11, the American public needs more time and money spent on investigating that crime than on investigating what Clinton did. Yet not even half the amount spent on Clinton has been spent on investigating 9/11. That, also, is a crime.

The following is a list of 38 “coincidences” that Professor Griffin says had to have happened in order for the crime of September 11, 2001 to be carried out the way the administration says it was carried out.

“1. Several FAA flight controllers exhibited extreme incompetence on 9/11 and evidently on that day only.

2. The officials in charge at both NMCC (National Military Command Center) and NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) also acted incompetently on 9/11, and evidently on that day only.

3. In particular, when NMCC-NORAD officials did finally order jet fighters to be scrambled to protect New York and Washington, they ordered them in each case from more distant bases rather than from McGuire and Andrews, respectively.

4. After public statements saying that Andrews Air Force Base has no jet fighters on alert to protect Washington, its website, which had previously said that many jets were always on alert, was altered.

5. Several pilots who normally are airborne and going full speed in under three minutes all took much longer to get up on 9/11.

6. The same pilots, flying planes capable of going 1,500 to 1,850 miles per hour, on that day were all evidently able to get their planes to fly only 300 to 700 miles per hour.

7. The collapse of the buildings of The World Trade Center, besides occurring at almost free fall speed, exhibited other signs of being controlled demolitions: molten steel, seismic shocks, and fine dust were all produced.

8. The video and physical evidence suggesting that controlled demolition was the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers co-exists with testimony from people in these buildings that had heard, felt, and saw the effects of explosions.

9. The collapse of WTC-1 and WTC-2 had some of the same features as the collapse of WTC-7, even though the latter collapse could not be attributed to the impact and jet fuel of an airplane.

10. Both the North Tower and the South Tower collapsed just as their respective fires were dying down, even though this meant that the South Tower, which had been hit second, collapsed first.

11. Governmental agencies had the debris, including the steel, from the collapsed WTC buildings removed without investigation, which is what would be expected if the government wanted to prevent evidence of explosives from being discovered.

12. Physical evidence suggesting that what hit the Pentagon could not have been a Boeing 757 co-exists with testimony of several witnesses that the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was far smaller than a 757.

13. This evidence about the aircraft that hit the Pentagon co-exists with reports that Flight 77 crashed in Kentucky or Ohio.

14. This evidence co-exists with the fact that the only evidence that Flight 77 did not crash was supplied by an attorney closely associated with the Bush administration.

15. Evidence that Flight 77 did not return to Washington to hit the Pentagon co-exists with the fact that when the flight control transcript was released, the final 20 minutes were missing.

16. The fact that the aircraft that hit the Pentagon did so only after executing a very difficult maneuver co-exists with the fact that it struck a section of the Pentagon that, besides containing none of its leaders, was the section in which the strike would cause the least death and destruction.

17. On the same day in which jet fighters were unable to protect the Pentagon from an attack by a single airplane, the missiles that normally protect the Pentagon also failed to do so.

18. Sounds from cell phones inside Flight 93 suggesting that the plane had been hit by a missile were matched by many reports to this effect from witnesses on the ground.

19. The evidence that Flight 93 was shot down co-exists with reports from both civilian and military leaders that there was intent to shoot this flight down.

20. The only plane that was evidently shot down, Flight 93, was the only one in which it appeared that passengers were going to gain control.

21. The evidence that Flight 93 was shot down after the passengers were about to gain control co-exists with the fact that the flight control transcript for this flight was not released.

22. That coincidence co-exists with the fact that when the cockpit recording of Flight 93 was released, the final three minutes were missing.

23. Evidence showing that the US government had far more specific evidence of what was to occur on 9/11 than it has admitted co-exists with evidence that it actively blocked investigations that might have prevented the attacks.

24. Reports of obstruction from FBI agents in Minneapolis co-exists with similar reports from Chicago and New York.

25. Reports of such obstructions prior to 9/11 co-exists with reports that investigations after 9/11 were also obstructed.

26. The reports of obstructionism co-exist with multiple reports suggesting that the US government did not really try to capture or kill Osama bin Laden either prior to or after 9/11, with the result that several people independently suggested that the US government must be working for bin Laden-or vice versa.

27. All these reports co-exists with the reports of hijackers being allowed in the country in spite of known terrorist connections or visa violations.

28. These reports about immigration violations co-exists with evidence that some of the same men were allowed to train at US flight schools, some on military bases.

29. The evidence of training at various American flight schools co-exists with reports that US officials tried to conceal this evidence.

30. The traumatic events of 9/11 occurred just a year after a document published by the Project for a New American Century, an organization whose founders included several men who became central figures in the Bush administration, referred to benefits that could come from “a new Pearl Harbor”.

31. The “unifying Pearl Harbor sort of purple American fury” produced by the 9/11 attacks did benefit the Bush Administration in many ways.

32. A credible report that spokesmen for the Bush administration had earlier announced that the US government was planning a war on Afghanistan, which would begin before the middle of October, co-exists with the fact that the attacks of 9/11, by occurring on that date, gave US military forces time to be ready to attack Afghanistan on October 7.

33. Ahmad Masood, whose continued existence would have posed problems for US plans in Afghanistan, was assassinated, reportedly by ISI (the Pakistani “CIA”) operatives, just after the head of ISI, General Mahmoud Ahmad, had been meeting in Washington for several days with the head of the CIA.

34. In the White House’s version of the recording of Condoleeza Rice’s press briefing on May 16, the only portion that was inaudible was the portion in which the person under discussion, mentioned as having been in Washington on 9/11, was identified as “the ISI chief”.

35. Evidence of official efforts to conceal General Ahmad’s presence in Washington co-exists with evidence that, after it became known that General Ahmad had ordered $100,000 wired to Mohamed Atta, US leaders exerted pressure on the ISI to dismiss him from his post quietly.

36. Evidence of these attempts to conceal General Ahmad’s involvement in 9/11 co-exists with evidence that the FBI and other federal agencies sought to obscure the fact that Saeed Sheikh, the man who wired the money to Atta, was an ISI agent.

37. The fact that agents in FBI headquarters who presided over the alleged intelligence failure that allowed 9/11 to happen, widely called the biggest intelligence failure since Pearl Harbor, were promoted instead of fired or otherwise punished co-exists with the fact that other intelligence agencies also reported that there had been no punishment for incompetence related to 9/11.

38. This evidence of lack of punishment for poor performance co-exists with reports that intelligence officers who were diligently trying to pursue investigations related to 9/11 suffered negative treatment from superiors.”

This is quite the number of things that “coincidentally” happened on or around September 11, 2001.

Since there is a possibility that President George W. Bush was complicit in the horrors of 9/11, there should be no one who wouldn’t want that proven or disproved.

Obviously, since as each day passes, Bush is complicit in the murders of Americans in Iraq, those who would want to see him brought to justice would want to make sure he is brought to justice for what happened on 9/11 as well.

His supporters would want a full and unhampered investigation into these charges so that it can be proven that he was not complicit in the 9/11 crimes.

Finding out whether the leader of your country was involved in the mass murder of Americans that enabled him to commit more murder of Americans should be important enough for everyone, bar none, to demand another investigation by an impartial special prosecutor. I can’t see how Americans wouldn’t want to prioritize their time to include helping in this cause.

For those who wish to further investigate on their own, here are just two more web sites dedicated to getting the truth out. Center for an Informed America and David Ray Griffin: Almost Perfect About 9/11.

[mtmynd]

Only last night I clicked on the various 9/11 topics listed under conspiracyplanet.com and here this morning I read this.

Yes, there are too many questions unleft answered regarding 9/11.

In adding to those questions, there is a probable link with Bush, Sr. who ran the CIA at the time of the Kennedy assasination... and some say Reagan was a changed man after his attempted assasination by a brother of a good friend of JEB Bush...

All these things sound sooo conspiratorial that nobody wants to even give it a second thought, but isn't that to the overwhelming advantage to the 'protagonists of wrong doings'..? I have often said that anything that reeked of consipiracy was a boon to those responsible... nobody wants to hear about it, and those that may investigate the probable conspiracy have total control ... they can toss out this idea and that idea to further confuse JQ Public thus having full control over what 'they' have done to their complete advantage - in effect the perfect crime.

welcome back, michael.

[Axanderdeath]

ya commy terorist bastard

[iblieve]

A similar theory was offered up right after 9-11 by the Moslem leaders in this country but no one would listen to them. Yes the fact that it is so believable scares the shit out of me and you know what scares me even more is that the American people bought it without questioning the facts. I wish you would post this at our site in Political Excretions, I would love for our members to read this.
http://akashanetweb.com/darc/index.php.

iblieve

[Michael]

mtmynd, Alexanderdeath, iblieve, you all responded to this quite a while ago.

I appreciate your responses. I hope that you read this even though it’s coming so long after your input.

mt, you’ve hit the nail right on the head. As I’ve written, conspiracies happen every day. Police normally investigate theories of conspiracies. They go into their investigations assuming nothing.

This brings me to your point, iblieve. The 9/11 Commission didn’t investigate the attacks to find out how they happened. If they did, they would have had to, like police, assumed nothing.

They went into the investigation starting at the point the administration wanted them to start at. They began investigating this atrocity by “knowing” who did it. By doing that, they eliminated lots of possibilities for how it could have been done. If one reads either of Professor Griffin’s books and/or The 9/11 Commission Report, one will see the contortions the Commission was going through to “fix the facts around” their conclusion.

However, if they treated the attacks like the crime it was, all involved, the air traffic controllers, military personnel, survivors of the attacks, eye witnesses, airport personnel, government personnel, from the top to where ever is appropriate, should have been made to testify under oath.

Since this was a murder case, who committed the murder should have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. How the murder was committed should have been a vehicle for finding out who committed it, not the other way around.

The commission went into the investigation investigating how the murderers were allowed to commit their crimes. Under these conditions, it would be easy for anyone to come to the conclusion that the FBI, The CIA, NORAD and the NMCC, as well as employees of the FAA were either dumb as a box of rocks or blatantly irresponsible. The question was, “Who let this happen?” The conclusion was to find a scapegoat.

The question that’s never been proven in a court of law and has never been answered beyond a reasonable doubt is who did this? The government came out with 19 names very quickly and a shocked American people, including The 9/11 Commission, angry enough to find someone against whom to take retribution, believed the government. Who did this has never been proven to this day.

Unbelievably enough, even though the commission eventually found several scapegoats including the CIA and FBI, they didn’t publicly ask for anyone to be reprimanded or fired and no one was. No one was publicly held accountable for allowing 3,000 people to be murdered on September 11, 2001.

When President Clinton lied about a personal affair, he was forced to be held accountable to the world. When 3,000 people were murdered, even if we are to believe the official account at face value, the people whose gross incompetence allowed the murders to take place should have been equally held accountable and punished.

I guess, according to the 9/11 Commission and to the administration, it’s OK for people in positions to have prevented the attacks or, at least, prevented the second or third attack, to get off with having had a “bad day”. It’s OK to tell them to communicate better, to hone their interpersonal skills.

Of course, judging by old Alexander’s remarks, the administration still has its blind followers.

Alexander, your post is the model of how the right debates. There’s no need to let facts get in the way of name calling and character assassination, is there? As long as you can make your opponent look silly or evil or just different, there’s no need for a mature exchange of ideas which may just disprove what’s included in “the longest thing I ever wrote”. Just attack it personally and your job’s done.

Bush is just so lucky that he’s caught America at a time when reality TV and watching cars turn left for hours at a time trumps serious, mature debate. He’s lucky he’s caught America at a time when there are so many people who claim to love America but clearly hate Americans. As long as there are “sheeple” around, people like Bush or Stalin or Hitler will never be far from positions of power.

iblieve, I will post this “longest thing I ever wrote” at your site. Thanks for inviting me to do so.

It really isn’t the longest thing I ever wrote. There just must be some confusion between the longest thing I ever wrote and the longest thing Alexander’s ever read.