The 9/11 Commission the only independent investigation into the greatest terror attack in US history began with a particularly benign mandate. The Preface to the report asserted: “Our aim has not been to assign <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf>individual <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf>blame <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf>,” but “to identify lessons learned.” --- investigators told the 911 Commission that the reason why they attacked is because of America's support of israel.
On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 9:06:00 AM UTC-5, MJ wrote: > > > SEPTEMBER 8, 2016 > > *9/11’S KNOWN KNOWNS *JEFF CLYBURN > > Years of willful deception, the sands of time, and simple neglect all tend > to cloud our perception of the reality of history. This is especially true > for politically radioactive topics like 9/11. > > With the debate over 9/11 heating up as the 15th anniversary of that > fateful day draws near, it’s a good time to get back up to speed. > *WhoWhatWhy* believes there are essential pillars of the 9/11 debate that > must be acknowledged by all parties before any healthy discussion of that > paradigm-changing topic can take place. > > What follows is a refresher list of “known knowns” select, broad aspects > of 9/11 that are at present beyond reasonable doubt: > > *• *The money trail was never followed to its logical conclusion. The > 9/11 Commission concluded the question of who funded the attacks “was of > little practical significance > <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf>.” > > *• *The Bush White House pushed back against > <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bush-opposes-9-11-query-panel/> any > independent investigation into 9/11. > > *• *Once the White House agreed to an independent investigation, it > provided a budget > <https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2003/03/29/911-panel-to-receive-more-money/81b568a9-610a-4901-9d0d-8012abcadaea/> > of > $3 million > <https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2003/03/29/911-panel-to-receive-more-money/81b568a9-610a-4901-9d0d-8012abcadaea/>, > > or 27% of the amount requested by 9/11 Commission co-chairs, Thomas Keane > and Lee Hamilton. > > *• *The Bush White House’s first choice to lead the 9/11 Commission was > the highly controversial Henry Kissinger. Under intense pressure due to > conflicts of interest, he resig > <http://edition.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/13/kissinger.resigns/> ned > <http://edition.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/13/kissinger.resigns/> a > month later. > > *• *The 9/11 Commission was compromised > <http://www.newsweek.com/untold-story-911-probe-93453> by having White > House policy advisor Philip Zelikow as its executive director. He was > alleged to have been in close contact with controversial > <http://www.rense.com/general31/EXPs.htm>White House Chief of Staff Karl > Rove throughout the investigation. > > *• *The 9/11 Commission the only independent investigation into the > greatest terror attack in US history began with a particularly benign > mandate. The Preface to the report asserted: “Our aim has not been to > assign <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf>individual > <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf>blame > <http://avalon.law.yale.edu/sept11/911Report.pdf>,” but “to identify > lessons learned.” > > *• *Saudi agents some with ties to the White House sent financial > and logistical support > <http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/how-us-covered-up-saudi-role-in-911/> to > men who then provided that support to the hijackers. That’s according to > the Congressional 2002 Joint Inquiry report, multiple media accounts and at > least one FBI agent who worked on 9/11 cases. > > *• *Efforts to further investigate Saudi nationals were resisted > <http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/how-us-covered-up-saudi-role-in-911/> by > the White House > <http://nypost.com/2016/04/17/how-us-covered-up-saudi-role-in-911/>and > CIA over and over again. > > *• *Indian intelligence, corroborated by the FBI, showed a wire transfer > of $100,000 from the phone of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) > chief Mahmud Ahmad to 9/11 lead hijacker Mohammed Atta in 2000. Ahmad (also > reported as Ahmed) was in > <http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?the_isi:_a_more_detailed_look=mahmoodAhmed&timeline=complete_911_timeline> > Washington > D.C. > <http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?the_isi:_a_more_detailed_look=mahmoodAhmed&timeline=complete_911_timeline> > > on the morning of the attacks, meeting with US lawmakers. > > *• *The $100,000 transaction was never mentioned in the 9/11 Commission > report and Ahmad was never detained for questioning. > > *• *The “28 pages” from a redacted chapter of the 2002 Joint Inquiry > report into the attacks, we were told, had “ nothing to do with national > security <http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/twenty-eight-pages>.” > But national security was the very reason given for withholding them for 14 > years by both the George W. Bush and Barack Obama White Houses. > > *• *Those 28 pages were partially released in July > <https://28pagesdotorg.files.wordpress.com/2016/08/declasspart4.pdf> of > 2016, but were still heavily redacted at crucial passages. > > *• *Multiple, overlapping war game drills > <http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2006/08/norad200608> created some level > of confusion at the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and > the Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) on the morning of the attacks. > > *• *Around noon on 9/11, air traffic controllers who handled some of the > hijacked flights made a recording recalling their experiences of the events > from a few hours earlier. The tape was later destroyed > <http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/06/national/faa-official-scrapped-tape-of-911-controllers-statements.html?_r=0> > > by an unidentified FAA supervisor without any transcripts taken. > > *• *In the days before 9/11, highly abnormal levels of put options > <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/profiting-from-disaster/> bets that a > stock price will fall were in place on major US stock markets for not > only the airlines involved, but also for multiple financial giants that > suffered significant losses in the attacks. > > *• *The SEC’s investigation into those irregularities gave little > details for their benign conclusion that all trades were legitimate and > curiously destroyed all their records > <http://www.globalresearch.ca/unusual-trading-in-stock-options-prior-to-9-11-government-destroyed-documents-regarding-pre-9-11-put-options/19750> > . > > *• *Blaming Iraq was the talking point advanced by the Bush > administration within days of the attacks > <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/plans-for-iraq-attack-began-on-9-11/>. > Later, multiple reports surfaced > <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bush-sought-way-to-invade-iraq/> alleging > that the neoconservatives who made up the hawkish Project for a New > American Century think tank and the Bush Administration had been planning > for (and discussing the need to publicly justify) an invasion of Iraq ( > and Afghanistan > <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/mar/24/september11.usa2>) long > before 9/11 > <http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB326/IraqWarPart1-Timeline.pdf>. > > *• *Iraq had absolutely nothing to do > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM> with 9/11. > > *• *Opium production (used to make heroin) in Afghanistan plummeted > under Taliban rule in 2001, but then ballooned again when US forces > retook control > <http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-spoils-of-war-afghanistan-s-multibillion-dollar-heroin-trade/91> > > of the region. > > *• *In the late 90s, the US supported the Taliban and its agenda for a > unified Afghanistan. Three years before 9/11, US oil giant Unocal pulled > out of a long-negotiated deal > <http://www.globalresearch.ca/9-11-possible-motives-of-the-bush-administration/1391> > > to build natural gas and oil pipelines through the region, from the > resource-rich Caspian basin south to the Indian Ocean. Skeptics insist the > US government and Unocal suddenly saw the Taliban, which provided a base of > operations for Al-Qaeda, as an obstacle to those pipeline plans. > > This is by no means a full list of inadequately-investigated facts > surrounding 9/11. > > People loyal to the official narrative at first denied the veracity of > many of these facts. Later, when the corroborations and confirmations > became overwhelming, they shifted gears, insisting these “knowns” didn’t > matter. > > We invite you to add your own bullet points in the Comments section below, > though we encourage you to focus on what has been well-documented, i.e., > what is available for all to verify on the public record. > > http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/09/08/911s-known-knowns/ > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
