By Ian Henshall
9/11 Doubts Seep into the Mainstream as Evidence Accumulates
The most significant expert may turn out to be Judge Ferdinando Imposimato, the widely respected honorary president of the Italian Supreme Court and legendary mafia hunter who lost his brother in a revenge attack.
Courtesy: liamscheff.com
|
www.Salem-News.com, September 19, 2012: (LONDON) - As the annual 9/11 remembrance draws to a
close, the world is as split as ever. Not only on whether the Afghan and
Iraq invasions were justified, but between those who accept
Washington's official 9/11 story and those who do not.
Under the mainstream media radar, the number of those
who do not is steadily increasing, forming substantial majorities in
places like Pakistan and Egypt and significant minorities even in NATO's
heartland countries, France, the UK and the US itself. The issue is not
whether, despite his denials, Osama Bin Laden might have wanted to
organise the 9/11 attacks but whether Al Qaeda actually had the
capability to infiltrate 19 terrorists into the US, including some very
well known to the CIA, and the four highly skilled pilots necessary to
pull off the spectacular coup. Up to then Al Qaeda's biggest success was
setting off two truck bombs in East Africa. (1)
The stereotype promoted by the corporate media of a
9/11 sceptic, a badly educated redneck watching Fox News in a trailer
park, could hardly be further from the truth. The website Patriot's
Question 9/11 lists hundreds of University Professors, over a thousand
architects and engineers and hundreds of aviation professionals who have
spoken out against the official 9/11 story. (8)
The most significant expert may turn out to be Judge
Ferdinando Imposimato, the widely respected honorary president of the
Italian Supreme Court and legendary mafia hunter who lost his brother in
a revenge attack. Imposimato has written to the Journal of 9/11 Studies
announcing his intention to bring a case before the International
Criminal Court citing key figures in the US administration for
involvement in the execution of the 9/11 attacks. (2)
Imposimato's take has received indirect support from
people close to the heart of Washington's power elite. Richard Clarke,
White House anti-terror czar at the time, has confirmed what researcher
Kevin Fenton has established based on a meticulous examination of
recently released official reports. Someone at the top of the CIA "made a
decision" to stand down the FBI and the CIA, allowing the alleged
hijackers a free run in the US when they would otherwise have been
arrested and the plot foiled. (9)
Meanwhile the 9/11 truth movement continues with a
drip, drip of new research. This year we have seen nothing on the scale
of the revelations of iron spheres and uncombusted nanothermite in the
dust at Ground Zero, strong indicators that the Twin Towers' spectacular
collapses on live TV were caused by something a lot hotter than diesel
fuel fires. But there are significant developments nonetheless.
Scientist Kevin Ryan was fired from work some time ago
after he went public saying his employer Underwriters Laboratories, the
company which had certified the quality of the steel used in the World
Trade Centre, was involved in creating fake computer simulations to help
support the official story that the fires were sufficiently hot to
cause the disastrous collapse of three skyscrapers. He has since been
beavering away at various aspects of the 9/11 story.
This year Ryan has released an analysis of the changes
that the 9/11 events have brought to the US building industry. If the
official story is to be believed, 9/11 was an architectural and
engineering disaster. Buildings expressly designed to withstand a high
speed jet impact and subsequent fire failed spectacularly. This disaster
should have led to an urgent and exhaustive inquiry with many action
points for other buildings of the same construction. Instead, says Ryan,
nothing like that happened.The US engineering community has acted as
though it does not believe the official 9/11 story any more than the
alleged conspiracy theorists in their trailer parks. (3)
Meanwhile the US Public Broadcasting System became the
conduit for the latest film from Architects and Engineers for 9/11
Truth: Explosive Evidence - The Experts Speak Out, with downloads
nationally pushing Bill Clinton's Convention Speech into third place, an
astonishing success for a topic the mainstream media as usual were
entirely deaf to (4). The film has a section in which psychologists and
counsellors explain why the media and sections of the public are so
reluctant to doubt an official story that might, from another
government, seem highly unlikely if not absurd. The reasons come down to
trauma, belief in authority and a phenomenon psychologists call
cognitive dissonance. For every trailer park dissident there are several
other citizens with a very strong desire to believe in authority,
especially after the terrifying circumstances and unprecedented media
barrage of 9/11. Confronted with contradictory evidence some time later,
such people suffer from painful cognitive dissonance and often resort
to denial.
An example of cognitive dissonance occurred last week
on CNN when Piers Morgan tried to dismiss Jesse Ventura, a maverick
politician and broadcaster. Morgan clearly knew little about the issue
and could only say the suggestion of an inside job was "preposterous".
The studio audience applauded Ventura. (10)
Another 9/11 researcher who goes by the name of
Shoestring has presented a very detailed analysis of the various
emergency offices that failed on the morning of 9/11. Probably the most
shocking was the FBI's emergency management office in Washington,
designed to cope with up to five major emergencies at one time, which
knew nothing more than the TV channels. In the light of so much other
bizarre activity - at the CIA, on the building investigation, the
failure of Washington's Andrews Airbase to scramble any of its fighters
for nearly two hours - the official 9/11 story of coincidence, surprise
and cock-up begins to look less likely than some of the alternatives.
(5)
But surely the post 9/11 war against Al Qaeda has
produced a network of detainees, led by Khalid Sheik Mohammed, who have
corroborated the official 9/11 story of a plot hatched in the caves of
Afghanistan? Even the supine 911 Commission was disturbed by the CIA's
refusal to allow them any contact with KSM or even his interrogators. As
suspicions of systematic torture were confirmed in media leaks, the CIA
illegally destroyed most of its own records, presumably to save its
officers the worry of future prosecution. This ugly picture of detainees
tortured into corroborating the official 9/11 story has been enhanced
by another recent revelation from the Defence Department Inspector
General: detainees were given truth drugs, or to put it in official
language were drugged with powerful antipsychotic and other medications
that “could impair an individual’s ability to provide accurate
information". (6)
Last year's bombshell from the White House anti-terror
czar at the time has produced a sequel. Richard Clarke has focused on
the role of the CIA saying the then boss George Tenet must have known
about the shocking unexplained decision to block three FBI field offices
from acting against several 9/11 hijackers. Most researchers agree that
the CIA's dedicated Osama Bin Laden Unit, kept secret until some years
after 9/11, is the best place to start asking questions. Up to now they
have focused on Bush favorite and torture advocate Cofer Black who
oversaw the unit before moving on to make money as a principal in
Blackwater, the mercenary company in Iraq.
Recently another CIA official has come into the frame:
Black's deputy in the CIA's counter terror center, Enrique “Ricky”
Prado. A book based on sources in the Miami Vice Squad describes Prado's
apparent double life as CIA official and a member of Florida's Cuban
mafia. The story was ignored by much of the mainstream media but carried
in detail in Wired magazine, the Daily Beast and the UK's Daily Mail,
which operates under stringent libel laws. (7)
When will the truth be known? Many agree that the
planet's intelligence services probably already know. Iran's President
Ahmedinajad's UN General Assembly speech calling for a new investigation
into 9/11 was greeted with predictable outrage and the corporate media
applauded when the NATO countries angrily walked out. But most countries
did not walk out and with global opinion ever more sceptical as time
goes by, this could prove a bad omen for Washington.
(2) http://www.
(3) http://digwithin.net/2012/09/
(4) digitaljournal.com/article/
(5) http://shoestring911.blogspot.
(6) http://www.washingtonsblog.
http://www.WantToKnow.info/
(9) Fenton's book is "Disconnecting the Dots", published by Trine Day
(10) http://edition.cnn.com/video/#
No comments:
Post a Comment