WAS 9/11 AN INSIDE JOB ?
(This article is free of copyright and is intended to be freely copied, distributed or printed in any form of publication)
This article is available online at www.truth911.net or a direct link: http://www.members.shaw.ca/truth911/truth911/was911job.html

INTRODUCTION

The world changed on September 11th, 2001 (9/11).  America was attacked. Nearly three thousand innocent people lost their lives.  It was the single most important day in our generation’s history.  The attacks of September 11th have forever changed the course of history, as it marked the beginning of the War on Terror.  But with any crime, we have to ask qui bono? (who benefits?).  Who had the means? The motive? The opportunity?

Since 9/11, the Bush administration and Governments around the world used the attacks to promote the need for increased security and justify the erosion of civil rights.  It was used as a pretext for war, to legitimize the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq.

We have all been told the story about what happened on that day.  Nineteen Arabs conspired and hijacked planes with box cutters and crashed them into the World Trade Center Towers , the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania .  The damage from the airplanes and the resulting jet fuel fires caused the Twin Towers to collapse.  The hijackers were part of a terrorist group called Al-Qaeda, under the control of Osama Bin Laden, hiding in a cave in Afghanistan .  This is the official conspiracy theory.

But what if the official conspiracy theory wasn’t true? What if it was all an elaborate hoax?  What if the government, the media, the people entrusted to protect us from the terrorists, were in fact, the terrorists themselves? What if 9/11 was a self inflicted wound, a false-flag attack, an inside job, committed by elements within the US Government, Military, and the global elite with ambitions for a new world order?

I used to believe the official conspiracy theory about 19 hijackers.  I had no reason to doubt it.  I wasn’t aware that there was an alternative conspiracy theory or that there was any doubt as to what happened on that historic day.  Then, one day, surfing the internet, I watched a free documentary movie on Google Video called “Loose Change”.

After seeing the shocking evidence in this film, I decided to do my own research.  I began checking facts, sources and taking a closer look at the evidence that the growing 9/11 truth movement has found.  After researching the alternative conspiracy theories, I could come to no other conclusion that the official story was really an official cover up and that 9/11 was not what it appeared to be.

I joined a group called the Scholars for 9/11 Truth, started by Professor Steven Jones, who teaches Physics at Brigham Young University in Utah, and Jim Fetzer, Distinguished McKnight University Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota, Duluth, a former Marine Corps officer, author or editor of more than 20 books.  Many distinguished professors and academics from respected institutions are members of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and have joined together to expose the official theory as a lie and to call for an independent investigation.

In the rest of this article I will attempt to explain the alternative conspiracy theory and strongest evidence that the 9/11 Truth Movement has discovered.  This grassroots movement simply calls for a truly independent and open investigation to explain the anomalies, contradictions, omissions and distortions that were present in official government reports and the official narrative, in hopes of discovering what really happened, why, and who was responsible.

9/11 COMMISSION REPORT

Though a full investigation into 9/11 was opposed by the U.S. Government, the families of victims demanded an independent investigation to answer their questions, resulting in the 9/11 Commission Report.  Chairman Kean and Vice Chairman Hamilton gave assurances that their Commission “sought to be independent, impartial, thorough, and nonpartisan.”[1]

Philip D. Zelikow, a Republican, was named the executive director and arguably had the most influence and control over the investigation and the final report.  Zelikow picked the areas of investigation, the briefing materials, the topic for hearings, the witnesses, and the lines of questioning for the witnesses.  In essence, Zelikow set the agenda and ran the investigation.  Though Kean and Hamilton were the public faces on the report, Zelikow was in charge of overseeing the writing of the staff reports, many of which went practically unchanged into the final report.  The commissioners were responsible for questioning witnesses, yet it was Zelikow’s staff who determined what information from these interviews would be included.  The “dedicated professional staff, headed by Philip Zelikow, has contributed innumerable hours to the completion of this report” after conducting “the exacting investigative work upon which the Commission has built.” [2]

David Ray Griffin’s book, The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions:[3]

Philip Zelikow had been very closely associated with the Bush White House.  He was on the National Security Council in the Bush I administration, where both he and Condoleezza Rice served as aides to National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft.  During the Clinton years, while the Republicans were out of office, he and Rice co-authored a book.  Zelikow also directed the Aspen Strategy Group, which involved Rice and Scowcroft as well as, among others, Dick Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz.  Then, he served on the national Security Council’s team for the transition between the Clinton and Bush II administrations.  In this role, he provided recommendations for Rice, who was becoming the National Security Advisor to the president.  Shortly after 9/11, Zelikow was appointed to the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, on which he served until becoming executive director of the 9/11 Commission in 2003. 

Because of his close ties to the Bush White House, Zelikow’s appointment was controversial from the outset.  The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission, in fact, repeatedly called for Zelikow’s removal.  The families were saying, in effect, that Zelikow’s appointment made a mockery of the idea that the Commission was “independent”.

The questionable role of Zelikow on the 9/11 Commission explains how facts could be distorted to advance an account of 9/11 that was untrue, to cover up the fact that 9/11 was an inside job.

WTC 7

World Trade Center Building Seven was a 47-story steel frame office building approximately 300 feet away from the North Tower . Although every other building surrounding the Twin Towers remained standing, this building suddenly collapsed into its own footprint in 6.6 seconds at 5:20pm on 9/11, roughly seven hours after the collapse of the Twin Towers .  This building was not hit by an airplane and only had small fires, yet the collapse exactly resembled a classic controlled demolition.  Many people remain unaware that this third building collapsed on 9/11.  Causing a building to fall into its own footprint is sometimes the goal of a controlled demolition so that adjacent buildings are not damaged during the collapse.  This is a very technically difficult feat to accomplish, requiring intensive planning and precision.

The tenants in the building were exclusively government agencies and financial institutions.  It contained offices of the IRS, Secret Service, CIA, SEC (Security and Exchange Commission) and then-Mayor Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management. [4]   The SEC was also using the building to store files pertaining to numerous Wall Street investigations all of which were all destroyed during the collapse.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was the first to investigate and published an official report dealing with the collapse of the WTC buildings. The FEMA report thought that “the performance of WTC 7 is of significant interest because it appears the collapse was due primarily to fire, rather than any impact damage from the collapsing towers.  Prior to September 11, 2001, there was little, if any, record of fire-induced collapse of large fire-protected steel buildings.” [5]

 FEMA determined that “loss of structural integrity was likely a result of weakening caused by fires on the 5th to 7th floors.  The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time.  Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence.  Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.” [6]

The 9/11 Commission report, a 567 page document, does not mention the collapse of WTC 7 anywhere in its report.  Though the 47 story building looked small in comparison to the Twin Towers (110 stories each), this would have been the tallest building in 32 other States, yet the 9/11 Commission Report did not feel as if the bazaar collapse was worth mentioning.

Larry Silverstein, who took out a 99 year lease on the entire World Trade Center Complex six weeks prior to 9/11, made a startling admission in a documentary that aired on PBS in September 2002.  He said in the interview that he remembered “getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure if they were going to be able to contain the fire. I said, we've had such terrible lose of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it and they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.” [7]   The term “pull” is controlled demolition slang for pull down, even used in the same documentary when an unidentified construction worker said “we're getting ready to pull building six” before they demolished the structure.  Upon leasing the WTC complex, Silverstein took out a massive insurance policy that entitled him to $3.55 billion in compensation.  However, due to the wording in the contract, Silverstein argued in court that he is entitled to $7.1 billion because, as the NY Times reported, “two planes hitting the two towers at two different times - constituted two occurrences, entitling him to two payments.” [8]

Explosives strategically planted throughout the building, detonated in a controlled demolition is the only way to explain the observed collapse of WTC 7.  This is further evident from the dust cloud that the implosion produced, as well as the molten metal that was found smoldering underneath the rubble.  Understanding that this building was brought down through controlled demolition, that normally take weeks of planning, is essential to opening your mind to the possibility that if this building was wired in advance for controlled demolition, that the same was possible for the Twin Towers.

TWIN TOWERS

Impact damage from airplanes and resulting jet fuel fires could not have caused the observed collapses of both World Trade Center Towers . Explosives must have caused the collapses through a top-down controlled demolition. Both towers collapsed symmetrically and at near free fall speed.  Steel beams were ejected hundreds of feet horizontally and the concrete was pulverized into very small particles creating a pyroclastic dust cloud. Explosions were reported throughout both towers and demolition explosion squibs were visible in the collapses.

Frank A. DeMartini, manager, WTC Construction and Project Management stated in a January 2001 interview on the History Channel that “the building was designed to have a fully-loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners, because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid. And the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting.” [9] A Boeing 707 is very comparable in size and fuel load to the planes used on 9/11. DeMartini worked on the 88th floor of the North Tower and died in the 9/11 attacks.

Many firefighters, survivors and eyewitnesses report secondary explosions; here are just a few accounts, though there are many, many, more, all available in the public record.

Firefighter Louis Cacchioli told People Magazine that “we were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building.” [10]

Pat Dawson, live on NBC, said that Albert Turi, the Chief of Safety of the Fire Department of New York City, told him that “he received word of the possibility of a secondary device, that is another bomb going off.  He tried to get his men out as quickly as he could, but he said there was another explosion, which took place… according to his theory, he thinks that were actually devices that were planted in the building.” [11]

Rick Sanchez reported live on MSNBC on 9/11 that he “spoke with some police officials moments ago, and they told me, that they have reason to believe, that one of the explosions at the World Trade Center, aside from the ones that may have been caused by the impact of the plane with the building, may have been caused by a van that was parked in the building that may have had some type of explosive device in it.  So their fear is that there may have been explosive devices planted in the buildings or in the adjacent area, and that’s why they’re being so cautious.” [12]

After 9/11, first responders gave official testimony in ‘World Trade Center Task Force Interviews’ that were made available through the New York Times website.

Firefighter, Edward Cachia, said on December 6th, 2001, that “as my officer and I were looking at the south tower, it just gave. It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit, because we originally had thought there was like an internal detonation explosives because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down.” [13]

Paramedic, Daniel Rivera, said on October 10th, 2001, that “it was a frigging noise. At first I thought it was -- do you ever see professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear "Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop"? That's exactly what -- because I thought it was that. When I heard that frigging noise, that's when I saw the building coming down.” [14]

Assistant Commissioner (F.D.N.Y.), Stephen Gregory, explained in his interview on October 3rd, 2001, that he knew that he “was with an officer from Ladder 146, a Lieutenant Evangelista, who ultimately called me up a couple of days later just to find out how I was. We both for whatever reason -- again, I don't know how valid this is with everything that was going on at that particular point in time, but for some reason I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked me if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him because I thought -- at that time I didn't know what it was. I mean, it could have been as a result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down.

Q. Was that on the lower level of the building or up where the fire was?

A. No, the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw. And I didn't broach the topic to him, but he asked me. He said I don't know if I'm crazy, but I just wanted to ask you because you were standing right next to me. He said did you see anything by the building? And I said what do you mean by see anything? He said did you see any flashes? I said, yes, well, I thought it was just me. He said no, I saw them, too. I don't know if that means anything. I mean, I equate it to the building cowing down and pushing things down, it could have been electrical explosions, it could have been whatever. But it's just strange that two people sort of say the same thing and neither one of us talked to each other about it. I mean, I don't know this guy from a hole in the wall. I was just standing next to him. I never met the man before in my life. He knew who was I guess by my name on my coat and he called me.” [15]

These shocking testimonies have been available in the public record for years, yet have never been reported in mainstream media or appeared in any official reports.

William Rodriguez, a janitor who worked in the North Tower for almost 20 years, reports an explosion in the basement moments before the airplane hit and then later throughout the building.  Since 9/11, Rodriguez has been trying to expose the truth to the world, often telling his story to Spanish audiences through foreign media that does not censor his testimony.

William Rodriguez is a hero for going back into the North Tower to lead firefighters up the stairwells to unlock doors with the only set of master keys available on that day so that people could escape before the towers collapsed. Rodriguez was officially the last person rescued alive from the North Tower rubble, taking cover underneath a nearby fire truck, sheltering him from the falling debris. He was commemorated in the White House for his heroism and became a representative for 9/11 victims and their families. His testimony has been continuously edited and omitted from official reports and the main stream media.

“Seconds after the first massive explosion below in the basement… I hear another explosion from way above,” said Rodriguez. “Although I was unaware at the time, this was the airplane hitting the tower, it occurred moments after the first explosion.” But before Rodriguez had time to think, co-worker Felipe David stormed into the basement office with severe burns on his face and arms, screaming for help and yelling “explosion! explosion! explosion!” David had been in front of a nearby freight elevator on sub-level 1 about 400 feet from the office when fire burst out of the elevator shaft, causing his injuries. “He was burned terribly,” said Rodriguez. “The skin was hanging off his hands and arms. His injuries couldn’t have come from the airplane above, but only from a massive explosion below. I don’t care what the government says, what scientists say. I saw a man burned terribly from a fire that was caused from an explosion below. I know there were explosives placed below the trade center. I helped a man to safety who is living proof, living proof the government story is a lie and a cover-up.” [16]

Jack Kelly, a foreign war correspondent for USA explained that “apparently what appeared to happen, was that at the same time two planes hit the buildings, that the FBI most likely thinks that there was a car or truck, packed with explosives, underneath the buildings, which also exploded at the same time and brought both of them down.” [17]

The concrete from both towers was pulverized into dust and ejected from the towers during the collapse, forming a pyroclasitc dust cloud.  The particles in the dust were very small, generally on the order of less than 50 microns, much of it in the very fine range of less than 10 micros. There is no mechanism for this degree of shattering of a material in a gravity fall where concrete slabs simply bump into one another and come together during a collapse.  To create these tiny dust particles, chemical bonds within a material must be shattered, requiring a very large energy input. [18]   Virtually all of the concrete and everything inside the towers, except the steel, was turned into the dust cloud.  Governor of New York , George Pataki, explained to CNN that “there’s very little concrete.  All you see is aluminum and steel.  The concrete was pulverized.  And I was down here Tuesday, and it was like you were on a foreign planet.  All of lower Manhattan , not just this site, from river to river, there was dust powder, two-three inches thick.  The concrete was just pulverized.” [19]

The extreme symmetry of the collapse violates basic physics.  Objects tend to follow the path of least resistance since normally if tall, slender objects fail in some way, they will tend to topple over.  In both cases, the WTC towers telescoped straight down along their axis of greatest strength.  The supporting beams, the 47 massive central steel box columns responsible for the majority of the gravitational load, provided no resistance during the collapse.  Each column was 14 by 36 inches, with 4-inch-think walls at the base of the towers.  It then tapered up to 1/4-inch walls in the upper floors, which had far less weight to support.  The 9/11 Commission Report deals with this issue by explaining that “the outside of each tower was covered by a frame of 14-inch-wide steel columns… These exterior walls bore most of the weight of the building.  The interior core of the building was a hollow steel shaft, in which elevators and stairwells were grouped.” [20]   Such a blatant lie is clear evidence of unimaginable ignorance or a deliberate cover-up.

Both towers fell in roughly ten seconds which is at virtually freefall speed.  In other words, they fell at approximately the same speed as a bowling ball dropped off of one of the towers.  Essentially none of the kinetic energy of the building is being dissipated.  All of the kinetic energy is going into accelerating the mass, which is what occurs in a freefall.  If any of this kinetic energy was being diverted into breaking the physical structure of the building below or pulverizing concrete, it would have significantly slowed down the speed of the collapse.  Explosives must have been used so that once the top of the building began to fall; it did not encounter any resistance from the structure below, permitting freefall.

Since the WTC bombing in 1993, security at the WTC Towers was high, making it difficult for bombs to be smuggled in and planted throughout the building.  The company in charge of security was formerly named Securacom and is now named Stratesec.  Its CEO, Barry McDaniel, said the company had a “completion contract” to handle some of the security at the World Trade Center “up to the day the buildings fell down.” [21]   George W. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush, was on the board of directors of Securacom, providing electronic security for the World Trade Center , Dulles International Airport and United Airlines. The company was backed by an investment firm, the Kuwait-American Corp., also linked for years to the Bush family.

Newsday interviewed Daria Coard, a guard at Tower One, who revealed that bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed on Thursday September 6th. [22]

Scott Forbes, a senior database administrator for Fiduciary Trust in the South Tower , has come forward to expose the unusual and unprecedented power-down that occurred the weekend before 9/11. He explained that his company put forth a huge investment in time and resources to take down their computer systems due to the deliberate power outage.  This process, Forbes recalled, began early Saturday morning (September 8th) and continued until mid-Sunday afternoon (September 9th) – approximately 30 hours. As a result of having the electricity cut, security cameras were rendered inoperative, as were its I.D. systems and elevators to the upper floors. [23]

People Magazine published comments on September 12th made by Ben Fountain, a financial analyst with Fireman's Fund who worked on the 48th floor of the South Tower . “How could they let this happen?” Fountain asked. “They knew this building was a target. Over the past few weeks we'd been evacuated a number of times, which is unusual. I think they had an inkling something was going on.” [24]

PENTAGON

The Pentagon was allegedly hit by American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757, on 9/11. However, physical evidence suggests that the aircraft that actually struck the Pentagon was smaller than a Boeing 757. There is no piece of available evidence that can prove that the Pentagon was hit by a Boeing 757.

Hani Hanjour, the hijacker who allegedly flew AA77, was described as a very poor pilot by flight instructors who denied him the rental of a single engine Cessna.  Hani Hanjour supposedly executed a 330 degree turn, descending 7000 feet in 2 and a half minutes, crashing into the side of the pentagon at 530 mph [25] , hitting the lower floors without touching the grass in front of the Pentagon.

An air traffic controller told ABC news that “the speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane.” [26]

Veteran Pilots have come forward to explain that “the airplane could not possibly have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into a high speed stall.  The airplane won’t go that fast when you start pulling those high G maneuvers. That airplane would have fallen out of the sky.” [27]

The video tapes that have been released do not clearly show what hit the pentagon.  There are only two frames, from two cameras, both from a similar angle, showing the aircraft and only of what appears to be the tip of the nose of the plane.  From the videos released it is difficult to conclude that it was even an airplane, let alone a Boeing 757. The U.S. Government refuses to release many withheld video tapes showing what hit the Pentagon. 

National Geographic published an article stating that the nearby CITCO gas station’s employee, Jose Velasquez, had told them the gas station's security cameras are close enough to the Pentagon to have recorded the moment of impact. “I've never seen what the pictures looked like,” Velasquez said, “the FBI was here within minutes and took the film.” [28] This video was released in September 2006 but the video was of such poor quality that nothing was distinguishable.

A Washington Post article stated that “a security camera atop a hotel close to the Pentagon may have captured dramatic footage of the hijacked Boeing 757 airliner as it slammed into the western wall of the Pentagon. Hotel employees sat watching the film in shock and horror several times before the FBI confiscated the video as part of its investigation.” [29]

There are many video cameras that would have filmed the plane that hit the Pentagon. Despite requests under the Freedom of Information Act to release these tapes, the FBI refuses to do so. There are up to 85 tapes in the possession of the FBI that may show the type of plane that hit the pentagon. The FBI claims that they have released the only two videos that captured the impact of the Pentagon. The 85 videos supposedly do not show the impact but may show the plane flying towards the Pentagon. If the FBI would release these video tapes, it would conclusively establish if a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon. The requests to release these tapes have been denied using manipulative wording to make it appear as if there is nothing of interest on these videos. By claiming that “these videotapes did not show either the Pentagon building, the Pentagon crash site, or the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001”, [30] they denied the release of these tapes. Even though that statement is likely true, if a video camera captured footage of the plane on its way to the Pentagon but did not actually film the building, crash site or impact, it would fall under this classification.

In any event, what hit the Pentagon turns out to be irrelevant because any hostile aircraft approaching the Pentagon, in restricted airspace, should have been shot down.  The airspace over the Pentagon and White House is arguably the most protected airspace in the world.  The Pentagon was struck at 9:37, over half an hour after the second tower was hit and over 40 minutes after AA 77 was hijacked and off course.

Norman Mineta, the acting Secretary of Transportation on 9/11, testified before the 9/11 Commission in a public hearing that he entered the Presidential Emergency Operations Center (PEOC) at 9:20 a.m. where Vice President Dick Cheney was in charge.  In his testimony, Mineta explained that “probably about five or six minutes” after he entered the PEOC, he observed a conversation between Dick Cheney and a young aide. [31]

 

“… during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"”

This testimony contradicts the findings in the 9/11 Commission Report because according to its revised version of events, Cheney did not enter the PEOC until 9:58. [32]   Accounts by Richard Clark [33] , a White House photographer, and ABC News [34] all place Cheney in the PEOC long before the Pentagon was struck.  The 9/11 Commission Report explains that F-16 fighter jets were not attempting to shoot down the plane that hit the Pentagon, as previous sources state, but were instead chasing a phantom aircraft. [35]   The military was not notified at 9:24 about the plane approaching the Pentagon (as previous public records and testimony showed) [36] , but instead claims that the military only learned, by chance, that AA 77 was lost at 9:34, [37] minutes prior to the impact.  Mineta’s testimony proves that Cheney knew about the incoming aircraft with sufficient time to intercept and shoot it down, thereby saving the 125 victims [38] who died at the Pentagon.  The orders that the young man was referring to when he asked if “the orders still stand” must have been orders to stand down and allow the aircraft to hit the Pentagon. 

According to USA Today, the attack occurred on “the only part of the Pentagon that already had been renovated in an 11-year, $1.3 billion project meant to bolster it against attack.” [39]   Renovations were due to be completed on September 16th, 2001.

Casualties in the Pentagon consisted mostly of Navel Intelligence Officers and accountants. [40]   The Office of Naval Intelligence were likely monitoring the classified US Military war games that were taking place the morning of 9/11, some of which simulated terrorists using hijacked airplanes as weapons.  The confusion that ensued between the real world hijackings and the imaginary drills is likely what allowed the attacks to succeed.  The deaths of accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts and the destruction of accounting information also likely prevented discovering the whereabouts of $2.3 trillion that Donald Rumsfled admitted on September 10th, 2001 that the Pentagon “cannot track”. [41]

IRREGULARITIES

There were very suspicious stock trades in the weeks leading up to 9/11, suggesting that the terrorists had purchased put options in stocks relating to 9/11 with the knowledge that their stock prices would fall.  The purchases strongly suggest foreknowledge of specific details about the attacks.  The occurrence of such an imbalance occurring by fluke would be extremely rare.  The low probability of these trades occurring without foreknowledge cannot be brushed off as yet another bazaar coincidence that occurred on 9/11.  The Chicago Tribune reported that on “Sept. 6, put volume on United Airlines was 3,150, more than four times its average daily put volume this year, according to data from the Options Clearing Corp. Put volume for Boeing on Sept. 7 totaled 27,294, more than five times its average daily put volume this year.  The day before the attacks, put volume on American Airlines stock was 4,516, nearly 11 times its average daily volume for the year.  The insurance industry, also expected to be hard hit by the effects of the terrorist attacks, saw similar plays on its put options. Citigroup, which has a large insurance arm, and insurance broker Marsh & McLennan Cos. experienced extraordinarily high put volumes just days before the attacks.” [42] Sources told CBS News that “they have never seen that kind of imbalance before” [43] . 

 The only suspicious airline trades that occurred were the two companies whose planes were hijacked on 9/11.  Marsh occupied the exact floors that were impacted in the North Tower .  Citigroup had incriminating files destroyed in the collapse of WTC 7.  The 9/11 commission report deals with this anomaly by declaring that “some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation” and that “further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10.  Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades.  These examples typify the evidence examined by the investigation.” [44]

  This example is typical of the 9/11 Commission’s pre-determined conclusion that the attacks were committed solely by Al Qaeda.  They concluded that the trades must have been a strange coincidence because “ U.S. -based” institutions could not have possibly had foreknowledge of the attacks.

On September 23rd, 2001, the BBC reported that “another of the men named by the FBI as a hijacker in the suicide attacks on Washington and New York has turned up alive and well. The identities of four of the 19 suspects accused of having carried out the attacks are now in doubt.” [45]   The 9/11 Commission Report however, still lists the original 19 hijackers and makes no mention of the BBC article.  FBI director Robert Muller even admitted on CNN that the identities of some of the hijackers are “in question” and that they are “not certain as to several of the others”. [46]

In September 2000, the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) issued a 90-page report entitled Rebuilding America 's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, And Resources For A New Century, proceeding “from the belief that America should seek to preserve and extend its position of global leadership by maintaining the preeminence of U.S. military forces.” [47]   Members include: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Jeb Bush and Paul Wolfowitz. [48]   In the document, they declare that “further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent of some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor .” [49]

CONCLUSION

Skeptics of this information should, at the very least, admit that there are many omissions and distortions in the official story and many unanswered questions, coincidences and anomalies that have been noted, which justify a truly independent investigation.

If you agree that 9/11 was an inside job or support an independent investigation, then maybe the more important question is ‘What are you willing to do about it?’  What are you willing to sacrifice? Where is your line in the sand?

Please show this article to friends, family, co-workers and even complete strangers.  Please print, photocopy and distribute this information.  This article will be available on truth911.net (linked at the bottom of the summary page), as well as more detailed information contained in the site.  One of the best way to learn more about 9/11 is to watch movies and videos on the subject, also available on www.truth911.net.  (I do not make any revenue whatsoever from my website or my efforts in the 9/11 Truth Movement.)

E-mail me at truthabout911@hotmail.com if you have comments, questions or want to get involved in helping to spread the truth about September 11th, 2001.

- truth911.net

---

9/11 Truther Cyberzine - Articles - Adam Letalik