CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE OR TREASON?
Commentary on a NY Times article on 9-11
by Jared Israel [posted 15 September 2001]
Note: We published this analysis September 15th. Not a word has been changed
in the text. We think the issues raised here have not been answered. Please
let us know what you think.
-- John Flaherty emperors1000@aol.com
[Emperor's Clothes has published a series documenting the U.S.
Establishment's involvement in 9-11. A list of these articles has been added
at end.]
=======================================
"Police radio broadcasts 'This was a terrorist attack. Notify the Pentagon.'
9:08 a.m."
('Daily News' (New York), 12 September 2001, NEWS SECTION; Pg. 24: THE
TRAGIC TIMELINE, our emphasis)
[Emperor's Clothes note: This was after the first and second planes had
struck the WTC Towers. The third plane is said to have hit the Pentagon 35
minutes later, at 9:43 am.
"In Sarasota, Fla., Bush was reading to children in a classroom at 9:05 a.m.
when his chief of staff, Andrew Card, whispered into his ear. The president
briefly turned somber before he resumed reading. He addressed the tragedy
about a half-hour later. " ['AP' 12 September 2001, our emphasis]
"President Bush listened to 18 Booker Elementary School second-graders read
a story about a girl's pet goat Tuesday before he spoke briefly and somberly
about the terrorist attacks."
--Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 12 September 2001 Pg. A20 HEADLINE: 'Bush hears
of attack while visiting Booker' [Emperor's Clothes note: The school was
Emma E. Booker Elementary School in Sarasota, Fla.]
We are not soothsayers.
We cannot say with certainty what happened September 11 - that is, what
really happened, behind the scenes.
But the following report from the semi-official 'N.Y. Times' makes it clear
that either Americans are being lied to by the those in the highest places -
which if true has the gravest implications - or else the rulers of
Washington's New World Order are criminally negligent.
In analyzing the 9-11 nightmare, we were puzzled by the official response to
the so-called third plane. That is the one that left Dulles Airport, flew to
Ohio, near the West Virginia and Kentucky borders, turned around, flew back
to Washington and struck the Pentagon.
Concerning this plane, we asked: how could it stay in the air, hijacked, for
almost an hour after two other hijacked planes had struck the WTC Towers,
and not be seen by U.S. air defense forces? How could it fly to the Midwest,
turn around and fly back to Washington and hit the Pentagon without being
spotted and therefore intercepted?
The 'N.Y. Times' published the following explanation:
"During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 was under the
control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the
Pentagon, military officials in a command center on the east side of the
building were urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control
officials about what to do.
"But despite elaborate plans that link civilian and military efforts to
control the nation's airspace in defense of the country, and despite two
other jetliners' having already hit the World Trade Center in New York, the
fighter planes that scrambled into protective orbits around Washington did
not arrive until 15 minutes after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon." ( 'N.Y.
Times,' Sept. 15, 2001)
This explanation makes matters worse.
If it was difficult to believe that the third plane was not spotted, then it
is a good deal harder to believe that it was spotted and tracked for over
half an hour and yet nothing was done because officials "didn't know what to
do."
Why didn't they force the plane down and failing that, shoot it down? Before
you think, "Because, as the article says, they didn't have a procedure for
handling such an occurrence," note the following comment from deputy defense
secretary Wolfowitz. Talking about the fourth plane, the one that crashed in
Pennsylvania:
"Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, said today that the Pentagon
had been tracking that plane and could have shot it down if necessary; it
crashed about 35 minutes after the Pentagon crash." ('N.Y. Times, Sept. 15,
2001)
"Could have shot it down if necessary."
If they "could have shot" down the fourth plane, why did they not shoot down
the third? Once they knew these were suicide hijackings - and surely they
knew that by around 9:00 am - why would they wait?
And why, if they really were confused about what to do, why, after the
Commander in Chief was informed about what was happening, didn't he
immediately convene an emergency meeting to discuss the issue? Why did he
keep reading to children and listening to stories about goats while the 3rd
plane flew towards Washington?
Officials knew the first and second planes had hit highly visible symbols of
US power. They knew this third plane was heading back to Washington.
Couldn't they be reasonably sure that the target was a symbol of US power in
Washington? Then why didn't they fully evacuate the Pentagon?
The White House has tried to confuse the issue regarding this question. They
claim the Plane changed course - that originally it was heading for the
White House:
"Top government officials have suggested that American Airlines Flight 77
was originally headed for the White House and possibly circled the Capitol
building." (CBS News, Sept. 21, 2001,
http://www.cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,310721-412,00.shtml)
But according to CBS, this is not the case:
"CBS News Transportation Correspondent Bob Orr reports that's not what the
recorded flight path shows." (ibid.)
Says CBS:
"Eight minutes before the crash, at 9:30 a.m. EDT, radar tracked the plane
as it closed to within 30 miles of Washington. Sources say the hijacked jet
continued east at a high speed toward the city, but flew several miles south
of the restricted airspace around the White House.
"At 9:33 the plane crossed the Capitol Beltway and took aim on its military
target. But the jet, flying at more than 400 mph, was too fast and too high
when it neared the Pentagon at 9:35. The hijacker-pilots were then forced to
execute a difficult high-speed descending turn.
"Radar shows Flight 77 did a downward spiral, turning almost a complete
circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes.
"The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it's clear there was no
fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver suggests the hijackers
had better flying skills than many investigators first believed.
"The jetliner disappeared from radar at 9:37 and less than a minute later it
clipped the tops of street lights and plowed into the Pentagon at 460 mph."
(ibid.)
The White House denies this:
"At the White House Friday, spokesman Ari Fleischer saw it a different way.
"That is not the radar data that we have seen," Fleischer said, adding, "The
plane was headed toward the White House." (ibid.)
If the White House is right and CBS is wrong, why did the 'Times' report that:
"During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 was under the
control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the
Pentagon, military officials in a command center on the east side of the
building were urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control
officials about what to do." ('N.Y. Times,' Sept. 15, 2001)
Given the stories from CBS and the 'Times,' and given that the plane did in
fact hit the Pentagon, aren't the news reports more believable than the
White House denial?
And since in any case there could be no way of being absolutely sure where
the plane would strike, why weren't all the most sensitive buildings
evacuated to prevent:
"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Up to 800 people may have died Tuesday when a hijacked
commercial airliner was crashed into the Pentagon, officials said.
"Firefighters were still battling a fire on the west side of the 29-acre, 6
million-square-foot building late Tuesday, more than 12 hours after the
crash. Washington hospitals reported 71 people injured, some severely, and
another 100 to 800 were still listed as missing and possibly dead late
Tuesday. " (CNN at http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/pentagon.terrorism/)
And why wasn't this plane, the third plane, forced down or failing that,
shot down?
Regarding the fourth plane:
"Asked if rules of engagement would have allowed the Air Force to shoot the
plane down, [deputy defense secretary] Wolfowitz said: 'I think it was
pretty clear at that point that that airliner was not under the pilot's
control and that it was heading to do major damage.'
"He said any military intervention would have ultimately been the decision
of President George W. Bush....
"Forty minutes passed between the time New York's second World Trade Center
tower was struck and another commandeered plane crashed into the Pentagon..."
* Washington Post, 15 September 2001,
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/indict/wps15.htm#a
A) Officials knew that the third plane, and quite possibly the second, was
set to strike important targets.
B) They tracked the third plane for at least half an hour.
C) Supposedly George Bush, Jr. needed to approve shooting the plane down.
D) But instead of going into an emergency meeting, he continued his visit to
an elementary school, hearing about goats.
What we have here is either criminal negligence beyond belief, and that
includes the Commander in Chief, who hearing that planes are destroying the
country focuses on goats, or b) the 'N.Y. Times' piece is repeating a cover
story whose purpose is to explain away the obvious flaw in the original
story: namely, that a plan could be hijacked in Ohio, and fly all the way
back to Washington without being spotted.
And if the 'N.Y. Times' story is a lie, then those who fed the 'Times' this
lie are guilty of conspiracy. They are people in high places and they are
directly involved in the murder of God knows how many people in N.Y. as well
as the 800 casualties the media speaks of in Washington either because they
planned these attacks, perhaps working through Islamist groups secretly
controlled by the CIA or they knew the attacks were going to happen and
wanted to let them happen. The obvious motive: to create a seeming
justification for extreme military action. And that is why they did not
allow the Air Force to stop possibly the second and certainly the third planes.
So there you have it - either criminal negligence, including Mr. Bush who
reads about goats while his countrymen are slaughtered, or treason.
Given these amazing facts, available in the mainstream media, why is there
no call for an investigation?
Mr. Bush has called for bringing those responsible to justice. Let us begin
at home.
- Jared Israel
To read the 'N.Y. Times' article quoted above, see:
'AFTER THE ATTACKS: SKY RULES; Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way
to Stop It,' at http://emperors-clothes.com/news/15.htm
Join our email list at http://emperors-clothes.com/f.htm. Receive about one
article/day.
= = = = = = = = = = = =
FURTHER READING:
= = = = = = = = = = = =
For documentation that the air safety/air defense system was sabotaged with
the involvement of top leaders on 9-11 see:
* 'Guilty for 9-11: Bush, Rumsfeld, Myers,' at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-1.htm
* 'Update on 'Guilty for 9-11,' at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/indict/indictupdate.htm
* 'Guilty for 9-11, Section 2: Cheney's Cover Story,' at
http://www.emperors-clothes.com/indict/indict-2.htm
* 'DC AIR NATIOAL GUARD WEBSITE USED TO PROMISE HIGHEST POSSIBLE STATE OF
READINESS...'
http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/update630.htm
1) Rick Rozoff takes a critical look at Washington's response to Tuesday's
tragedies in 'Bush's Press Conference: Into the Abyss' at
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/rozoff/abyss.htm
2) While Washington points to Osama bin Laden as "suspect # 1" in
yesterday's horrific violence, the truth is not being told to the American
people: 'Washington Created Osama bin Laden' by Jared Israel can be read at
http://emperors-clothes.com/articles/jared/sudan.html#w
3) If one looks carefully, one can find in the Western media evidence that
bin Laden has been involved - on the U.S.-backed side - in Kosovo, Bosnia
and now Macedonia.
4) Bin Laden was propelled into power as part of the U.S. drive to create an
Islamist terrorist movement to crush the former Soviet Union. See, the truly
amazing account from the 'Washington Post,' 'Washington's Backing of Afghan
Terrorists: Deliberate Policy.' at http://emperors-clothes.com/docs/anatomy.htm
5) Head of Russian Airforce says official scenario couldn't have happened.
See 'Russian Airforce Chief Says Official 9-11 Story Impossible' at
http://emperors-clothes.com/news/airf.htm
6) Emperor's Clothes has interviewed Rudi Dekkers from the Huffman Aviation
facility, at which two of the hijack suspects were students a year ago.
Though Mr. Dekkers' told the interviewer he had received many calls, the
media has not published his comments. The interview was taped and the text
on Emperor's Clothes is a verbatim transcript, including the grammatical
errors common in daily speech. See "Interview With Huffman Aviation Casts
Doubt on Official Story" at http://emperors-clothes.com/interviews/dekkers.htm
[Note: Since our interview with Dekkers he has appeared on TV retracting his
original (very strongly held) opinion. Given the scope of the forces
attempting to intimidate dissent, we believe Dekkers' original statement,
which he said represented the opinion of many airline pilots who had called
him, and not the public retraction. - Emperor's Clothes, 15 December 2001.]
=======================================
EMPEROR'S CLOTHES NEEDS YOUR HELP
=======================================
On 18 September about 100,000 readers transferred more than 1.7 gigabytes of
data from Emperor's Clothes. That's the equivalent of over 1.5 million pages
in printed books.
As you may know, the Website was "down" for about four hours that day. We
are strained beyond capacity trying to get out the word.
We recently hired a full time computer person, remodeled the Website, and
now need to adapt to the huge increase in demand for Emperor's Clothes.
You can help. We need contributions right away to pay our resident computer
guru and to make Emperor's Clothes available all the time despite the
much-increased demands on bandwidth.
Please send whatever contributions you can!
You can make a credit card donation by going to our secure server at
http://emperors-clothes.com/howyour.html#donate
Or Mail a check to Emperor's Clothes, P.O. Box 610-321, Newton, MA
02461-0321. (USA)
Or make a donation by phone at the donation line, (U.S.) 617 916-1705.
Note: If you mail a donation or make one by secure server, please let us
know by email at emperors1000@aol.com to make sure we receive it. Thanks!
Thank you for reading Emperor's Clothes.
TO EMAIL SOMEONE A LINK TO THIS TEXT, copy and paste the following in your
browser:
mailto:ENTER FRIEND'S EMAIL ADDRESS HERE?subject=Here's an interesting
article from emperors-clothes.com&body=I just read an article which I
thought you would find interesting. Here's the address:
http://emperors-clothes.com/indict/update630.htm
***
www.emperors-clothes.com or
www.tenc.net
[Emperor's Clothes]
To unsubscribe, which can only be done from an email address which is
actually subscribed, click or send an email to unsubscribe@emperor.vwh.net
|