Former MI5 Agent Says 9/11 An Inside Job

quote:

Het ontbreken van enig teken van explosies voor het instorten van WTC 7 maakt voor springmeesters het gebruik van explosieven voor het laten instorten van dat gebouw al vrijwel onmogelijk.

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 juli 2005 12:25 schreef Hallulama het volgende:
Zou kunnen RM-rf, en wat zegt dat over de strenge toelatingseisen (psychologisch onderzoek, etc.) van MI5?

quote:

Op vrijdag 1 juli 2005 12:27 schreef Hallulama het volgende:
Deze kon ik overigens nog niet:

"FYI, sniffer dogs used to search the twin towers for explosives on a routine basis. A few days before 911 it was decided that this was no longer neccesary and the practice was halted."

Is iemand dit elders tegengekomen?

quote:

Security at the WTC Was Increased in Mid-August 33
According to journalists Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair – publishers of the muckraking newsletter CounterPunch – a man who worked at the World Trade Center told them that “security was heightened three weeks ago [before the attacks], including the introduction for the first time of sniffer dogs and the physical search of all trucks prior to their being waved into the entrance from the street.”

quote:

WTC janitor pulls burn victim to safety after basement explosion rocks north tower seconds before jetliner hit top floors. Also, two other men trapped and drowning in a basement elevator shaft, were also pulled to safety from underground explosion..

What happened to William Rodriguez the morning of 9/11 is a miracle. What happened to his story after-the-fact is a tragedy.

But with miracles and tragedies comes truth. And truth is exactly what Rodriguez brings to the whole mystery surrounding 9/11.

Declared a hero for saving numerous lives at Ground Zero, he was the janitor on duty the morning of 9/11 who heard and felt explosions rock the basement sub-levels of the north tower just seconds before the jetliner struck the top floors.

He not only claims he felt explosions coming from below the first sub-level while working in the basement, he says the walls were cracking around him and he pulled a man to safety by the name of Felipe David, who was severely burned from the basement explosions.

All these events occurred only seconds before and during the jetliner strike above. And through it all, he now asks a simple question everybody should be asking? How could a jetliner hit 90 floors above and burn a man's arms and face to a crisp in the basement below within seconds of impact?

Rodriguez claims this was impossible and clearly demonstrates a controlled demolition brought down the WTC, saying "Let's see them (the government) try to wiggle out of this one."

Well, they haven't wiggled out of it because the government continues to act like Rodriguez doesn't exist, basically ignoring his statements and the fact he rescued a man burnt and bleeding from the basement explosions.

His eye witness account, ignored by the media and the government, points the finger squarely on an official cover-up at the highest levels since the government contends the WTC fell only from burning jet fuel. And after listening to Rodriguez, it's easy to see why the Bush administration wants him kept quiet.

Bush wants him quiet because Rodriguez's account is 'proof positive' the WTC was brought down by a controlled demolition, not burning jet fuel. And Bush knows if he's caught lying about this or caught in a cover-up, it's just a matter of time before the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

In fact, Rodriguez's story is so damaging - so damning - it literally blows the lid off the government story, literally exposing the whole 9/11 investigation as a sham and a cover-up of the worst kind.

And it appears the cover-up also extends to the media.

NBC news knew about his story several years ago, even spending a full day at his house taping his comments. But when push came to shove, his story was never aired. Why?

His eyewitness account, backed up by at least 14 people at the scene with him, isn't speculation or conjecture. It isn't a story that takes a network out on a journalistic limb. It's a story that can be backed up, a story that can be verified with hospital records and testimony from many others.

It's a story about 14 people who felt and heard the same explosion and even saw Rodriguez, moments after the airplane hit, take David to safety, after he was burnt so bad from the basement explosion flesh was hanging from his face and both arms

So why didn't NBC or any other major news outlets cover the story? They didn't run it because it shot the government story to hell and back. They didn't run it because "the powers that be" wouldn't allow it.

Since 9/11, Rodriguez has stuck to his guns, never wavering from what he said from day one. Left homeless at times, warned to keep quiet and subtly harassed, he nevertheless has continued trying to tell get his message out in the face of a country not willing to listen.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 juli 2005 10:04 schreef Oversight het volgende:
ik heb de volgende feiten nog nergens weerlegd gezien.....
Based on current research, this is a succinct list of the “hardest evidence available about the 9/11/01 attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon; this information directly contradicts the American government’s version of events.

--The hole in the Pentagon was too small to have been made by a 757 passenger plane, as photos show. The impression made was approximately half the size of the airplane.

quote:

--Larry Silverstein, the World Trade Center’s leaseholder, is on tape saying 'Pull it,' in regard to WTC building 7. This building fell suddenly though it was not hit by a plane.

quote:

--The Bush Administration misled Americans about the health affects of the WTC attacks, stating "the air is safe to breathe," in order to reopen Wall Street and surrounding areas.

quote:

--According to eye witness testimony by several reporters and other citizens, explosions occurred at the WTC on 9/11. News footage is available..

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 juli 2005 08:21 schreef YuckFou het volgende:
Intressant om te kijken is de docu 'In Plane Site' van ThePowerHour goed te vinden op P2P.
als je de timeline op 30:15 zet zie je een aantal NY brandweer mannen met koffie in de hand het volgende verklaren:

'we saw them going'
'boom boom boom boom boom'
'floor by floor it started to popin' out'
'it was like if, like if, it started an, detonate,how do you call it?'
'detonated'
'yeah like they had detonate plans to take down the building'
'yeah boomboomboomboomboom'
'all the way down, I was wandering...'

quote:

--WTC damage was inconsistent with fire (Fire Engineering Magazine); yet consistent with the use of explosives.

quote:

--Bush blocked investigations into 9/11, then refused to testify under oath before the '9/11 Commission.' The Bush Administration benefited directly from the attacks in 'political capital.'

quote:

--Critical evidence from the 9/11 attacks was destroyed; the government has only released 25% of the documents requested by the 9/11 Commission, these documents have large blacked-out areas.

quote:

--The 9/11 attacks were used as a pretext for the war in Iraq; this war, based on ‘bad intelligence’ has resulted in the loss of more than 100,000 lives.

quote:

--Five different air military training exercises were taking place on 9/11/01. Was this done purposely to confuse American air defense?

quote:

--At least four of the '9/11 suicide hijackers' have turned up alive. The identities of several more are in question. The FBI director admitted not all of the hijackers are known, (New York Times, Washington Post, BBC news).

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 juli 2005 12:25 schreef tong_poh het volgende:
of deze link: http://wtc.nist.gov/

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 juli 2005 15:41 schreef YuckFou het volgende:
intressante link, ik ga vanavond als ik wat tijd heb de pdf's downloaden en doorlezen, maarrrr de site eindigt op .gov
dus als conspiracy-aanhanger neem ik de info wel met een tikje argwaan...

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 juli 2005 12:25 schreef tong_poh het volgende:
Ik zeg niet, dat ze allemaal weerlegd zijn. Maar de meesten wel.

Voor details hierover, moet je de andere topics eens lezen. Met name chewie en wombcat komen met hele goede argumenten.

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 juli 2005 10:04 schreef Oversight het volgende:
ik heb de volgende feiten nog nergens weerlegd gezien.....

Based on current research, this is a succinct list of the “hardest evidence” available about the 9/11/01 attack on the World Trade Center and Pentagon; this information directly contradicts the American government’s version of events.

--The hole in the Pentagon was too small to have been made by a 757 passenger plane, as photos show. The impression made was approximately half the size of the airplane.

--Larry Silverstein, the World Trade Center’s leaseholder, is on tape saying “…Pull it,” in regard to WTC building 7. This building fell suddenly though it was not hit by a plane.

--The Bush Administration misled Americans about the health affects of the WTC attacks, stating "the air is safe to breathe," in order to reopen Wall Street and surrounding areas.

--According to eye witness testimony by several reporters and other citizens, “explosions” occurred at the WTC on 9/11. News footage is available..

--WTC damage was inconsistent with fire (Fire Engineering Magazine); yet consistent with the use of explosives.

--Bush blocked investigations into 9/11, then refused to testify under oath before the '9/11 Commission.' The Bush Administration benefited directly from the attacks in 'political capital.'

--Critical evidence from the 9/11 attacks was destroyed; the government has only released 25% of the documents requested by the 9/11 Commission, these documents have large blacked-out areas.

--The 9/11 attacks were used as a pretext for the war in Iraq; this war, based on ‘bad intelligence’ has resulted in the loss of more than 100,000 lives.

--Five different air military training exercises were taking place on 9/11/01. Was this done purposely to confuse American air defense?

--At least four of the '9/11 suicide hijackers' have turned up alive. The identities of several more are in question. The FBI director admitted not all of the hijackers are known, (New York Times, Washington Post, BBC news).

--Assia Mortensen May, 6, 2005

bron

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 juli 2005 19:51 schreef NILATS het volgende:

[..]

Inderdaad......... Jij, Chewie en Wombcat blijven maar posten.............

Waarom blijven jullie maar doorgaan, terwijl je volledig achter de algemeen geaccepteerde versie van 9/11 staat.

Wat willen jullie bereiken?

Als ik ergens niet in geloof....... dan ben ik niet zo gestoord om dag en nacht de believers op te zoeken en met mijn voorgekauwde argumenten te bestoken.

Wat willen jullie nou?

Welk doel dient het?

quote:

Op zaterdag 2 juli 2005 12:25 schreef tong_poh het volgende:
Wat betreft:" Pull it" Dit is een ongelooflijke punt van discussie. In de termen van een demolisionist, betekent pull it, dat de gebouw opgeblazen wordt. In het geval van een brandweer of rescue ploeg betekent het, dat men het gebouw gaan verlaten, omdat er niks meer te doen valt of dat het te onveilig is geworden.

quote:

Op zondag 3 juli 2005 00:13 schreef Finder_elf_towns het volgende:

[..]

In diverse docu's van National Geographic en Discovery Channel worden ze 1 voor 1 weerlegd. Die laatste is overigens gewoonweg niet waar. Er is geen enkel bewijs dat die kaper nog zou leven.

quote:

Op zondag 3 juli 2005 00:13 schreef Finder_elf_towns het volgende:

[..]

In diverse docu's van National Geographic en Discovery Channel worden ze 1 voor 1 weerlegd. Die laatste is overigens gewoonweg niet waar. Er is geen enkel bewijs dat die kaper nog zou leven.

quote:

Op zondag 3 juli 2005 00:38 schreef tong_poh het volgende:

[..]

Waarom zou je hier alleen maar mogen posten, als je in de conspiracy theories gelooft?

Wat ik wil bereiken, is duidelijk maken dat heel veel van de theorieen die over 9/11 die op het internet rondgaan
makkelijk te weerleggen zijn. Ik kan niet voor de anderen spreken, maar ik denk dat dat ook een beetje hun doel is. Trouwens daar is een forum voor. Om meerdere aspecten van een discussie te voeren en niet alleen van 1 kant.


Dat jij er niet in gelooft, dat is jou recht. Net zoveel recht dat wij hebben om te posten in een discussie forum.

Dus doe eens alsjeblieft een lol en blijf weg als je alleen wil zeiken. Ik denk dat ik voor de meesten spreek als ik zeg, dat we geen flame wars willen hebben. Het is nu eindelijk eens rustig in zo'n topic als deze en dit kunnen we niet gebruiken.

quote:

Op zondag 3 juli 2005 17:14 schreef NILATS het volgende:

[..]

Discovery docu's betrouwbaar?

Een docu van Discovery over de moord op JFK.

Conclusie; Lee Harvey Oswald was de enige schutter.

quote:

Op zondag 3 juli 2005 17:18 schreef NILATS het volgende:

[..]

Jij hebt alle recht om hier te posten........... maar dat was niet mijn vraag.

Mijn vraag is: waarom zoveel moeite investeren in dit topic?

Ik kom hier simpelweg om de nieuwste info over 9/11 te ontdekken, danwel toe te voegen en erover te praten met andere mensen die de officiële versie bullshit vinden.

Jullie gedrevenheid doet mij het meest denken aan Jehova getuigen, die de ongelovigen opzoeken om het woord van God te brengen.

quote:

Op zondag 3 juli 2005 17:14 schreef NILATS het volgende:

[..]

Discovery docu's betrouwbaar?

quote:

Een docu van Discovery over de moord op JFK.

Conclusie; Lee Harvey Oswald was de enige schutter.

quote:

Betrouwbaarder dan Alex Jones,

quote:

Overigens komt iedereen die de zaak niet uitsluitend van internet afleest en daadwerkelijjk veldwerk uitvoerd tot de conclusie dat Lee Harvey de enige schutter was.

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 03:09 schreef -Angel- het volgende:
Deze complottheorieen vallen goed bij linkse en extreem rechtse mensen, die met dit soort theorieen willen aantonen dat de VS en met name de huidige regering de kwaadwillende is. In de complottheorie komt als maar naar voren dat de Bush regering er van af wist en niets heeft gedaan om het te stoppen - kortom de complottheorie heeft als doel om de vinger te leggen op zogenaamde verraad van de Bush regering. Men wil hun haat tegen de Bush regering en de VS in het algemeen rechtvaardigen.

Het zijn theorieen die vaak onbewezen, onwaarschijnlijk, of fout zijn. Ach ja, het helpt weer een handje om wat meer de VS, de Bush regering, de CIA te haten. Dus post er nog maar één, omarm hem, en verdedig hem tot het uiterste. Kortom manipuleer zodat uiteindelijk je eigenbelang gediend is. En we weten wel wat het belang is van de meeste mensen die deze theorieen ondersteunen.

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 01:44 schreef Finder_elf_towns het volgende:
Betrouwbaarder dan Alex Jones, overigens liegt Alex Jones zelfs als hij zijn mond dicht houd, dus betrouwbaarder overkomen dan hem is niet zo heel erg moeilijk.

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 01:44 schreef Finder_elf_towns het volgende:
Heb jij het bewijs dat er meerdere schutters waren? Overigens komt iedereen die de zaak niet uitsluitend van internet afleest en daadwerkelijjk veldwerk uitvoerd tot de conclusie dat Lee Harvey de enige schutter was. Is dat zo moeilijk te begrijpen?

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 03:09 schreef -Angel- het volgende:
Deze complottheorieen vallen goed bij linkse en extreem rechtse mensen, die met dit soort theorieen willen aantonen dat de VS en met name de huidige regering de kwaadwillende is. In de complottheorie komt als maar naar voren dat de Bush regering er van af wist en niets heeft gedaan om het te stoppen - kortom de complottheorie heeft als doel om de vinger te leggen op zogenaamde verraad van de Bush regering. Men wil hun haat tegen de Bush regering en de VS in het algemeen rechtvaardigen

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 03:09 schreef -Angel- het volgende:
Het zijn theorieen die vaak onbewezen, onwaarschijnlijk, of fout zijn. Ach ja, het helpt weer een handje om wat meer de VS, de Bush regering, de CIA te haten. Dus post er nog maar één, omarm hem, en verdedig hem tot het uiterste. Kortom manipuleer zodat uiteindelijk je eigenbelang gediend is. En we weten wel wat het belang is van de meeste mensen die deze theorieen ondersteunen.
_{PS: Een complottheorie is onmogelijk omver te werpen.}

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 01:44 schreef Finder_elf_towns het volgende:

[..]

Betrouwbaarder dan Alex Jones, overigens liegt Alex Jones zelfs als hij zijn mond dicht houd, dus betrouwbaarder overkomen dan hem is niet zo heel erg moeilijk.
[..]

Heb jij het bewijs dat er meerdere schutters waren? Overigens komt iedereen die de zaak niet uitsluitend van internet afleest en daadwerkelijjk veldwerk uitvoerd tot de conclusie dat Lee Harvey de enige schutter was. Is dat zo moeilijk te begrijpen?

quote:

Op zondag 3 juli 2005 23:55 schreef tong_poh het volgende:

[..]

Ik geef antwoord op jouw vraag in mijn vorige post.

Voor de rest ga ik er niet meer op in. Ik heb het gevoel, dat je een ongenuanceerde reactie probeert uit te lokken. Die lol ga ik je niet gunnen.

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 09:24 schreef NILATS het volgende:

[..]

Ik begin jou beter te begrijpen.

Jij hebt een soort afwijking, waardoor jij denkt dat vragen beantwoord zijn, terwijl er helemaal niet op in wordt gegaan.

Dat verklaart waarom jij denkt dat alle vragen over 9/11 door het officiële rapport zijn beantwoord.

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 10:27 schreef Mirage het volgende:

[..]

NILATS, je verpest het topic.
Ga even verder in feedback ofzo. Truth FeedBack

quote:

Were there explosives in 1 & 2 WTC? And what about 7 WTC? To me, it just doesn't make sense. Think about the risks you are taking with 500 million people watching those burning towers on tv. On the other hand, in the weeks before 9/11 we had the following things reported going on at the towers; multiple evacuations, power downs, heavy maintenance work, and disabled security. On 9/11 we had trucks driving around Manhattan rumored to have carried explosives, dozens of people on record stating that they heard explosives (including loads of firemen), people telling they were hurt by explosives (especially in the basement), and even what seems to be quite a bit of visible evidence during the collapses. And that's only part of the story, there is quite a bit more. So no matter how crazy it sounds, I think it's irresponsible to drop this theory at this time. We aren't talking about "can fire alone have done this?". We are talking about at least dozens of anomalous witness testimonies and probably many hundreds or even thousands more. That brings me to the obvious question, "where are these people today?".....

quote:

Firemen Louie Cacchioli:
"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 were bombs set in the building."
One of the firemen that entered the lobby of the WTC (interviewed by the Naudet brothers):
"The lobby is about six stories high and the lobby looked as though a bomb had exploded there. All the glass was taken out, there were 10 foot by 10 foot marble panels that were once walls...er...they were loose from the wall of the World Trade Center." (mentioned before)
Another fireman that entered the lobby of the WTC (interviewed by the Naudet brothers):
"I went around by the freight elevator and I could see it was just blown...30th floor, we could hear another explosion." (mentioned before)
In June of 2002 some transcripts of the firemen at the scene were released:
”Official: Battalion 3 to dispatch, we've just had another explosion.”
“Official: Battalion 3 to dispatch, we've had additional explosion.”
“Dispatcher: Received battalion command. Additional explosion.”
Live transcript:
"We got another explosion on the tower..."
Live transcript:
"I got, uh, an eyewitness who said there was an explosion on floors 7-8, 7-8."
Live transcript:
"We got another explosion on the tower. 10-13, 10-13."
Live transcript:
"Battalion 3 to dispatch, we've just had another explosion."
Live transcript:
"Tower 2 has had a major explosion and what appears to be a complete collapse surrounding the entire area."
Live transcript:
"...Warren Street, because of the secondary explosion. We have numerous people covered with dust because of the secondary explosion..."
Live transcript:
"I was involved in the secondary, uh, explosion at tower 1, Kay..."
Anonymous person on TV. Seems to be a spokesman for the fire department:
"We're trying to get some of the people out. There were some secondary explosions and then the subsequent collapses."
NBC reporter Pat Dawson at the morning of 911:
"...The Chief of Safety of the Fire Department of New York told me that...er...he thinks that there were actually devices that were planted in the building. One of the secondary devices he thinks that took place after the initial impact was, he thinks, may have been on the plane that crashed into one of the towers. The second device, he thinks, he speculates, was probably planted in the building. We are continuing to hear explosions here downtown."
A group of firemen in the documentary ‘911 – the filmmakers’:
Fireman one: "We made it at least two blocks and we started running. Floor by floor it started popping out." Fireman two: (makes sound and hand gestures to show how the floors popped out) "It is if they had detonators..."
Fireman one: "Yeah! detonators..."
Fireman two: "It is if they had planned to take down the building…boom…boom …boom…boom”
Fireman one: "Yeah...detonators...all the way down, I was watching it and running."
Fireman three: "Right, just ran up west."
Fireman one: "And then you saw this cloud of shit chasing you down the road."
Randy Lavello article:
"Before beginning this article, I met Auxiliary Lieutenant Fireman and former Auxiliary Police Officer, Paul Isaac Jr. at the World Trade Center Memorial. Paul, along with many other firemen, is very upset about the obvious cover-up and he is on a crusade for answers and justice. He was stationed at Engine 10, across the street from the World Trade Center in 1998 and 99; Engine 10 was entirely wiped out in the destruction of the towers. He explained to me that, “many other firemen know there were bombs in the buildings, but they’re afraid for their jobs to admit it because the ‘higher-ups’ forbid discussion of this fact.” Paul further elaborated that former CIA director Robert [James] Woolsey, as the Fire Department’s Anti-terrorism Consultant, is sending a gag order down the ranks. “There were definitely bombs in those buildings,” he told me. He explained to me that, if the building had ‘pancaked’ as it’s been called, the falling floors would have met great resistance from the steel support columns, which would have sent debris flying outward into the surrounding blocks. I asked him about the trusses, and quoted the history channel’s ‘don’t trust a truss’ explanation for the collapses. He responded in disbelief, and told me, “You could never build a truss building that high. A slight wind would knock it over! Those buildings were supported by reinforced steel. Building don’t just implode like that; this was a demolition.” (http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_lavello_050503_bombs.html - May5, 2003)

quote:

Daar bij komt nog eens dat die knallen na elkaar gewoon de vloeren zijn die op elkaar klappen.

quote:

1 dat boren moet opvallen
2 die draden krijg je niet perfect weg gewerkt

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 21:29 schreef Merovingian. het volgende:
Wat wel een feit is, is dat er een enorme coverup voor 'iets' aan de gang is geweest.

quote:

"...By this time, however, the room they were working in began to fill with a white smoke. “We smelled kerosene....The two decided to ascend the stairs to the C level, to a small machine shop where Vito Deleo and David Williams were supposed to be working. When the two arrived at the C level, they found the machine shop gone...“There was nothing there but rubble, “Mike said. “We’re talking about a 50 ton hydraulic press – gone!” The two began yelling for their co-workers, but there was no answer...We couldn’t see through the smoke...The two made their way to the parking garage, but found that it, too, was gone. “There were no walls, there was rubble on the floor, and you can’t see anything” he said...They decided to ascend two more levels to the building’s lobby. As they ascended to the B Level, one floor above, they were astonished to see a steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up “like a piece of aluminum foil” and lying on the floor. “They got us again,” Mike told his co-worker, referring to the terrorist attack at the center in 1993. Having been through that bombing, Mike recalled seeing similar things happen to the building’s structure. He was convinced a bomb had gone off in the building." (Chief engineer Magazine - http://www.chiefengineer.org/article.cfm?seqnum1=1029)

quote:

"I go downstairs, the foreman tells me to go remove the containers. As I am walking by the main freight corridor building, in the corridor, that's when I got blown. I mean, the impact of the explosion of whatever happened threw me to the floor and that's when everything started happening. It knocked me right to the floor, you didn't know what it was of course. You're assuming something just fell over in the loading dock, something very heavy, something very big. You don't know what happened and all of a sudden you just felt the floor moving and get up and the walls...and then...now I'm hearing that the main freight car, the elevator fell down. I was right near the main freight car, so I'm assuming what that was. Then...you know...you heard that coming towards you. I was racing, I was going towards the bathroom...all of a sudden..I opened up the door...I didn't know it was the bathroom and all of sudden a big impact happening again and all of the ceiling tiles were falling down, the light fixtures were falling down, swinging out of the ceiling. And I come running out the door and everything...the walls were down and now I start running towards the parking lots...I just assumed a car or something exploded on B1 or something big or heavy thing fell over...when the floor is moving underneath you...there was a lot of smoke down there, a lot of people screaming...and were running up the ramps...you gotta go clear across the whole from one to two world trade center... and then, all of a sudden, it happened all over again; building 2 gets hit. And again, I don't know that, I just know that something else hit us to floor. Right in the basement you felt it, walls were caving in, everything that was going on. I mean, I know people that got killed in the basement, I know people who got broken legs in there in the basement, people got surgery, because the walls hit them in the face." (NY1 News - http://ny1.com/pages/RRR/911special_survivors.html )

quote:

"Hours after the hijacked planes flew into the World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field, an FAA manager at the New York Air Route Traffic Control Center gathered six controllers who communicated or tracked two of the hijacked planes and recorded in a one-hour interview their personal accounts of what occurred, the report stated... as is common practice.

According to the report, a second manager at the New York center promised a union official representing the controllers that he would "get rid of" the tape after controllers used it to provide written statements to federal officials about the events of the day.

Instead, the second manager said he destroyed the tape between December 2001 and January 2002 by crushing the tape with his hand, cutting it into small pieces and depositing the pieces into trash cans around the building, the report said...

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 21:29 schreef Merovingian. het volgende:


Wat wel een feit is, is dat er een enorme coverup voor 'iets' aan de gang is geweest. Alleen mensen die zich niet verdiept hebben in het gebeuren of er van profiteren zullen dat tegenspreken.

quote:

Op maandag 4 juli 2005 23:37 schreef ook_gek het volgende:

[..]

Maar stel het het het WTC expres is opgeblazen. HOE kan je in hemels naam ooit al die explosiefen op de juiste plaats leggen en er voor zorgen dat NIEMAND iets merkt van de plaatsing en dat niemand iets vind. DUIZENDEN mensen werken in het WTC

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2005 11:18 schreef tong_poh het volgende:
Wat ik gewoon een beetje raar vind is, dat men het ongeloofwaardig acht dat een wolkenkrabber instort doordat een passagiersvliegtuig volgeladen met kerosine met een vaart van 700+km/h erin crashed het wel geloofwaardig vinden, dat er explosieven geplaatst zijn, zodat het gebouw in stort nadat ze geraakt zijn door bovengenoemde vliegtuigen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2005 12:28 schreef YuckFou het volgende:

[..]

Wat ik er vooral zo raar in vind is hoe de gebouwen ingestort zijn, op welke manier en in welk tijdsbestek, en als je je daarin verdiept, vooral met ooggetuigen verslagen en beeldmateriaal dan kom je snel tot de conclusie dat er gerommeld is, hoe en wat is bijna niet te zeggen, maar dat er meer gebeurt is dan het officieele raport weergeeft is voor mij duidlijk

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2005 12:28 schreef YuckFou het volgende:

[..]

Wat ik er vooral zo raar in vind is hoe de gebouwen ingestort zijn, op welke manier en in welk tijdsbestek, en als je je daarin verdiept, vooral met ooggetuigen verslagen en beeldmateriaal dan kom je snel tot de conclusie dat er gerommeld is, hoe en wat is bijna niet te zeggen, maar dat er meer gebeurt is dan het officieele raport weergeeft is voor mij duidlijk

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2005 13:51 schreef tong_poh het volgende:

[..]

Ik heb al eerder een link gegeven, waarin een heel onderzoek staat over het WTC gebeuren.

Ik kom tot de conclusie, dat er niet gerommeld is. Wie heeft er gelijk? We zullen er denk ik nooit achterkomen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2005 14:06 schreef UncleScorp het volgende:
We moeten vooruit kijken, wat ze allemaal uitsteken met 911 als achtergrond-excuus.

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2005 18:13 schreef YuckFou het volgende:

[..]

ik heb alle pdf's binnen samen met het final raport 9-11 ook op PDF dus ik kan me voorlopig even gaan in en bijlezen...maar 't zijn nogal wat pagina's....

quote:

Teresa Veliz was a manager for a software development firm. She was on the 47th floor of the North Tower when American 11 struck. Veliz was able to reach the ground level at about the same time that the South Tower collapsed. Flung to the ground in total darkness, Veliz and a colleague followed another person who happened to have a flashlight. As she narrated later: “The flashlight led us into Borders bookstore, up an escalator, and out to Church Street. The explosions were going off everywhere. I was convinced that there were bombs planted all over the place and someone was sitting at a control panel pushing detonator buttons. I was afraid to go down Church Street towards Broadway, but I had to do it. I ended up on Vesey Street. There was another explosion. And another. I didn’t know which way to run.

quote:

There was an explosion—I didn’t think it was an explosion—but the base of the building shook. I felt it shake . . . then when we were outside, the second explosion happened and then there was a series of explosions. . . . We can only wonder at the kind of damage—the kind of human damage—which was caused by those explosions—those series of explosions”
"There was a huge bang and the building physically shook...Seconds later there were two or three similar huge explosions and the building literally shook again.

quote:

Is veel lezen ja. maar ik denk als je de final report globaal doorleest, dat er al veel duidelijk kan worden.

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2005 20:02 schreef Merovingian. het volgende:

[..]

Dan wordt je geen ene reet duidelijk want het is 1 kant van het verhaal. Je moet op z'n minst een paar honderd origenele nieuwsberichten samenvoegen en dan het rapport lezen. 2 verschillende verhalen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2005 21:56 schreef tong_poh het volgende:

Het enige wat ik zeg is: Doe kennis op over zaken. Relateer dingen uit je eigen leven naar het verhaal. Probeer logisch te blijven in je benadering naar bepaalde zaken. Zorg, dat je de onderzoek op een wetenschappelijke manier aanpakt. Doe het desnoods zoals het geleerd is op de uni of op de hogeschool.

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2005 21:56 schreef tong_poh het volgende:

[..]

Er wordt veel duidelijk gemaakt. Er wordt heel duidelijk uitgelegd, hoe de schade is ontstaan en hoe het heeft bijgedragen aan het instorten van de WTC torens. Dit is geen 1 kant van het verhaal, maar 200 kanten van het verhaal. Er hebben namelijk 200 onafhankelijke wetenschappers aan het rapport meegewerkt.

Wat betreft, dat over explosies. Er kunnen door vuur en kleinere instortingen in de kapotte lifschacht veel fenomenen voor doen, die veel geluid produceren. Als hier in de buurt alleen al een container van 1 meter laten vallen (op ongeveer 500m afstand), dan is het net alsof een bom ontploft. Ik schrik me altijd de pleuris.

Bij elke willekeurige gebeurtenis, kan ik vreemde dingen er bij bedenken. Dat is de mens eigen. Ik zie het dagelijks mensen vinden complotten leuk en zien ze overal. Dat mag en ik ben zelf ook niet vies van een complot theorie. Maar ik probeer altijd een complot te bewijzen of te weerleggen op basis van plausibele en waarschijnlijke verklaringen.

Ik kan hier nog een uur typen en dan helemaal alles in de puntjes uit te leggen exact wat ik bedoel, maar dan ben ik midden in het verhaal alweer vergeten wat ik aan het begin heb gezegd.

Het enige wat ik zeg is: Doe kennis op over zaken. Relateer dingen uit je eigen leven naar het verhaal. Probeer logisch te blijven in je benadering naar bepaalde zaken. Zorg, dat je de onderzoek op een wetenschappelijke manier aanpakt. Doe het desnoods zoals het geleerd is op de uni of op de hogeschool.

Met name op gebied van kennis schort het op het gebied van 9/11 er hier veel aan. Sommige mensen blaten complete onzin over de vliegtuigen en de luchtverkeersleiding in sommige topics. veel van die dingen ken ik als iemand die in een familie vol luchtvaart enthousiasten zit en zelf ook in de luchtvaart werkt makkelijk ontkrachten. Als men de kennis zou bezitten, zouden ze ook niet meer geloven. Zoals het verhaal, dat het 737's was die de WTC's geraakt zouden. Ik ken echt wel het verschil tussen een 737 en een 767. Die kan ik nog van een paar km van elkaar onderscheiden.

quote:

- Wie handelden er voor minstens honderden miljoenen met voorkennis op vliegtuigmaatschappijen en gerelateerde bedrijven?
- Waarom stond er geen 1 Arabiër op geen van de vrijgegeven passagierslijsten?
- Waarom werden er erg specifieke inlichtingengegevens genegeerd van Engeland, Frankrijk, Duitsland, Rusland, Israel, Egypte, Jordanië, Marokko, Italië en zelfs de Taliban? (of van het eigen parlement)
- Waarom waren er talloze geruchten dat er een grote terroristische aanslag in de VS op komst was? (hint...misschien door alle data van de inlichtingendiensten)
- Wat was de bedoeling van alle oefeningen boven het Noord-Oosten van de VS op de morgen van 11 september? Er waren nep-evacuaties bezig bij de NRO door een zogenaamde vliegtuiginslag, er waren zogenaamd vliegtuigen gekaapt in de buurt van de New York en Washington, en de voorbereidingen voor een bioterreur oefening waren vrijwel klaar op Manhattan zelf. Waarom duurde het 3 jaar voor deze info eindelijk een beetje (ik herhaal "een beetje") naar buiten kwam? Waarom is er nog steeds niet op ingegaan door Rumsfeld en de Chiefs of Staffs?
- Waarom waren de Florida kapers drugsgebruikende feestgangers die betrokken waren bij figuren die drugs met learjets het land invlogen? (een van die jets werd onderschept met iets van 20kg heroïne. Het toestel was van de financiële backer van Rudi Dekkers)
- Waarom heeft de FBI niemand ondervraagt over (de in Nederland gezochte) Rudi Dekkers' tijdsverdrijf (iedereen wist dat hij een dikke vette crimineel was) of niemand ondervraagt die de Florida kapers heeft ontmoet?

quote:

Op dinsdag 5 juli 2005 23:30 schreef tong_poh het volgende:
Ik kan op alle vragen antwoord geven, als ik eventjes de tijd zou nemen.

De vraag is: accepteer je die antwoorden.

Antwoord: Nee.

quote:

Net zoals ik mijn conclusie klaar heb, heb jij ook je conclusie klaar. Maar daar gaat het op dit moment niet over. Het gaat erover of de WTC torens en WTC7 opgeblazen zijn door explosieven of niet. Dat is duidelijk niet het geval. Zeker las je het rapport leest zou het overduidelijk moeten zijn. . Als je dat niet vindt, dan is dat jou goed recht. Kan ik voor de rest niks aan doen.

quote:

Nog eens eventjes terugkomen op jouw vragen. Ik heb in een vorig topic al aandacht aangegeven, dat iedereen denkt dat de politiek en de inlichtingen diensten een geoliede machine zijn. Dat zijn ze dus niet. Ze hebben fouten gemaakt, zijn fouten aan het maken en zullen in de toekomst fouten blijven maken. Ze hebben te lijden onder bureaucratie, incompetentie, machtsstrijd, enzovoorts.

quote:

Wat betreft dat handelen in voorkennis. Wie heeft dat dan gedaan? Is daar bewijs van, zoals officiele documenten? Of is het hear say? Want in hear say geloof ik niet zo. ik kan ook ergens een site in elkaar toveren en van alles beweren. Maakt het niet perse waar. Als het gestaafd werd met goede argumenten, dan ben ik bereid om het geloven. Anders niet.

quote:

”In calling for a new investigation, some structural engineers have said that one serious mistake has already been made in the chaotic aftermath of the collapses: the decision to rapidly recycle the steel columns, beams and trusses that held up the buildings. That may have cost investigators some of their most direct physical evidence with which to try to piece together an answer.”

quote:

I find the speed with which potentially important evidence has been removed and recycled to be appalling.

quote:

A growing number of fire protection engineers have theorized that the structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers… The current [FEMA] investigation is a half-baked farce…the destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately…

quote:

Early tests on steel beams from the World Trade Center show they generally met or were stronger than design requirements, ruling them out as a contributing cause of the collapse of the towers, federal investigators said Wednesday....preliminary tests on some of the 236 pieces.

quote:

I'd like to be able to have a set of the drawings for all of the affected buildings…I don't have that….I have not been given access.

quote:

There are better ways to study the tragedy of September 11. Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything.

quote:

The vice president expressed the concern that a review of what happened on September 11 would take resources and personnel away from the effort in the war on terrorism.

quote:

President Bush personally asked Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle Tuesday to limit the congressional investigation into the events of September 11... He asked that only the House and Senate intelligence committees look into the potential breakdowns among federal agencies that could have allowed the terrorist attacks to occur, rather than a broader inquiry that some lawmakers have proposed, the sources said.

quote:

http://www.themodernreligion.com/terror/wtc-unusualtrading.html
[url=http://www.cbsnews.com/st(...)ews/main311834.shtml

quote:

Op woensdag 6 juli 2005 01:13 schreef Hallulama het volgende:
Tong_poh, de waarheid ligt ongetwijfeld (zoals altijd) in het midden.

Ik denk alleen dat het officiele 9/11 rapport VER van het midden staat.

quote:

Op woensdag 6 juli 2005 00:37 schreef Merovingian. het volgende:

Put up or shut up. En dat van die inlichtingendiensten weet ik. Trouwens, dit is me laatste antwoord op jouw, want je snapt het hele gebeuren gewoon niet.

quote:

Op woensdag 6 juli 2005 09:35 schreef Wombcat het volgende:
Klopt, in de politiek is de waarheid niet zo belangrijk, maar de beeldvorming van mensen.

quote:

Op woensdag 6 juli 2005 19:39 schreef Hallulama het volgende:

That's okay dude, ik schommel zelf heen en weer, maar ik moet zeggen, ik heb heel wat debunking shit gelezen, maar het overtuigt gewoon voor geen meter.

quote:

Je quote een aantal mensen, die een politieke slag willen slaan.

quote:

Kijk! En daarin verschilt het nou. Ik ben het met je eens, dat de waarheid in het midden ligt.

quote:

Een user hier heeft ook al eens uitgelegd hoe de trendbreuk van de put-opties al voor 9/11 plaatsvond, maar dat 9/11 het versterkt heeft. Hierdoor lijkt het alsof er voorkennis van 9/11 was, terwijl de trendbreuk ergens anders door veroorzaakt werd.

quote:

Stel eens voor dat we het net als jouw snappen, wat willen we dan bereiken? Of wat willen we aantonen?

quote:

Op woensdag 6 juli 2005 19:58 schreef Wombcat het volgende:

[..]

Dan zit volgens jou die user dus ook in het complot, want hij heeft er ook aan verdiend.
Zie hier: [9/11] Let's focus on two things

quote:

9/11 INSIDER TRADING, OR: “YOU DIDN’T REALLY SEE THAT, EVEN THOUGH WE SAW IT”

A“put” option is a leveraged bet that a stock price is going to fall precipitously
(a “call” option is the opposite bet). One option covers 100 shares of a given
stock and usually has an expiration date of four months. For a very small investment
— sometimes a dollar a share — a speculator can purchase the right to sell
a stock at a fixed price during the contract period even though he doesn’t have to
own the stock when the option is placed. So if one were to place a single put
option contract on American airlines at $30 per share and the stock fell to $18 dollars
a few days or weeks later, one could go out and purchase one hundred shares
at $18 and then immediately exercise the option and sell them immediately at $30
netting a $12 per share profit or $1,200. This is what happened on a far larger scale
and with many companies around the world on 9/11.


Outrage and a clear mission

Sources tell CBS News that the afternoon before the attack, alarm bells
were sounding over unusual trading in the US stock options market
— CBS News, September 19, 2001.1

• A jump in UAL put options 90 times (not 90 percent) above normal
between September 6 and September 10, and 285 times higher
than average on the Thursday before the attack.
— CBS News, September 26

• A jump in American Airlines put options 60 times (not 60 percent)
above normal on the day before the attacks.
— CBS News, September 26

• No similar trading occurred on any other airlines.
— Bloomberg Business Report;2 the Institute for Counterterrorism
(ICT), Herzliyya, Israel3 [citing data from the CBOE]

• Morgan Stanley saw, between September 7 and September 10, an
increase of 27 times (not 27 percent) in the purchase of put options
on its shares.4

• Merrill-Lynch saw a jump of more than 12 times the normal level
of put options in the four trading days before the attacks.5

‘It’s not that farfetched,’ said former SEC enforcement director William McLucas, now with the Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering law firm. ‘This collection of terrorist acts has created a serious problem for our markets and a number of industry sectors. It is not as whacky or as Tom
Clancy-ish as one might like to wish.’ ‘This could very well be insider trading at the worst, most horrific, most evil use you’ve ever seen in your entire life…. It’s absolutely unprecedented
to see cases of insider trading covering the entire world from Japan to the United States to North America to Europe.’
— Dylan Ratigan of Bloomberg News, ABC World News Tonight, September 20, 2001.6

‘I saw put-call numbers higher than I’ve ever seen in 10 years of following the markets, particularly the options markets,’ said John Kinnucan, principal of Broadband Research, as quoted in the San
Francisco Chronicle.
— Montreal Gazette, September 19 2001

‘When I saw the volume of trading going up at other exchanges, I thought it was a little peculiar,’ said [Bill] Kennedy, of ING Group NV’s ING TT&S (US) Securities Inc, explaining that most trading that day was on other markets. ‘There had not been a lot of volume in American the previous week. You hope there was a reasonable explanation, and there may very well be, but it leaves a very bad taste in your mouth.’ 7 ‘It’s a matter of great interest to intelligence. To the extent we find this evidence, we shouldn’t just focus on it as proof of insider trading but as evidence of a desire to commit murder and terrorism,’ said Columbia University law professor John Coffee.8

Germany’s Bundesbank chief, Ernst Weltke, said on the sidelines of the meeting that a report of the investigation showed ‘bizarre’ fiscal transactions prior to the attacks that could not have been chalked up to coincidence…. Weltke said the transactions ‘could not have been planned and carried out without a certain knowledge,’ particularly citing heavy trading in gold and oil futures.9

‘It’s absolutely unprecedented to see cases of insider trading covering the entire world from Japan to the US to North America to Europe.’
— ABC News Consultant Jonathan Winer, World News Tonight, September 20, 2001

‘AMR [the parent company of American Airlines] now represents just a tiny piece of what has become a giant international paper chase.’
— National Post, September 22, 2001

‘From my perspective, it is very clear that there was highly unusual and suspicious activity in airline and hotel stocks in the days and weeks leading up to this attack.’ — Phil Erlanger, former senior technical analyst, Fidelity investments, writing in his newsletter Erlanger Squeeze Play,
November 13, 2001. Erlanger added that the inside traders might well have made off with billions of dollars from 9/11.

The Chicago Board Options Exchange, the biggest US options market, said yesterday that it is investigating trading that happened before the terrorist attacks that flattened New York’s World Trade Center and damaged the Pentagon.
— Montreal Gazette, September 19, 2001

‘[Investigators will] certainly be able to track down every trade, where the trade cleared, where the trade was directed from.’
— Former SEC enforcement chief William McLucas in an interview with Bloomberg News.10

‘If these clowns really bought puts on airline stocks and financial companies the day before the attacks, then they left another incriminating paper trail that may help provide proof of who masterminded the evil.’
— Bloomberg11


Backpedaling like crazy

Despite all the evidence to the contrary, the FBI’s Dennis Lormel12 said on October 3, 2001 before Congress that there were ‘no flags or indicators’ referring to mere ‘rumors’ about the pre-attack insider trading.13 However Treasury Secretary O’Neill downplayed hopes for a successful investigation by pointing out the challenge of penetrating veils of secrecy before a name can be attached to a suspicious trade. ‘You’ve got to go through ten veils before you get to the real source.’ 14
— Associated Press, September 20, 2001

After almost two weeks of investigation, financial regulators around the world have found no hard evidence that people with advance knowledge of the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington used that information to profit in the international securities markets. And a number
of officials are beginning to express doubt that such a plan existed. While the investigations are continuing and additional evidence is still to be reviewed, many leads that initially seemed to indicate a conspiracy to profit from the terrorist attacks have been found to have less sinister explanations.
— New York Times, September 28, 2001, International Herald Tribune, September 29-30, 200115

There has been a great deal of talk about alleged insider trading of airline stocks by associates of Osama bin Laden prior to the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon .… In fact, based on financial information almost immediately available to investigators, even the most febrile conspiracy theorists would have to agree that this dog don’t hunt .... such suspicions deserve nothing more than a curt ‘So what?’
— Insight Magazine 16

quote:

When all else has been eliminated

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, through his creation Sherlock Holmes, once said that whenever you have eliminated all the explanations that are not possible, whatever remains — no matter how unlikely — must be the truth. There is only one explanation of the 9/11 insider trades that fits with the known facts. And strangely enough it is my critics who have helped to make the case. The Insight Magazine story offered one critical piece by confirming that it was not difficult at all to establish in short order who made the trades. Lynne Howard, a spokeswoman for the Chicago Board Options
Exchange (CBOE), tells Insight that information about who made the trades was available immediately. “We would have been aware of any 9/11 Insider Trading 251

unusual activity right away. It would have been triggered by any unusual volume. There is an automated system called ‘blue sheeting,’ or the CBOE Market Surveillance System, that everyone in the business knows about. It provides information on the trades — the name and even the Social Security number on an account — and these surveillance systems are set up specifically to look into insider trading. The system would look at the volume, and then a real person would take over
and review it, going back in time and looking at other unusual activity.” Howard continues, “The system is so smart that even if there is a news event that triggers a market event it can go back in time, and even the parameters can be changed depending on what is being looked at. It’s a very clever system and it is instantaneous. Even with the system, though, we have very experienced and savvy staff in our market-regulations area who are always looking for things that might be unusual. They’re trained to put the pieces of the puzzle together. Even if it’s offshore, it might take a little longer, but all offshore accounts have to go through US member firms — members of the
CBOE — and it is easily and quickly identifiable who made the trades. The member firm who made the trades has to have identifiable information about the client under the ‘Know Your Customer’ regulations (see ‘Snoops and Spies,’ Feb. 22, 1999), and we share all information with the Securities and Exchange Commission.”

Given all of this, at a minimum the CBOE and government regulators who are conducting the secret investigations have known for some time who made the options puts on United and American airlines. The silence from the investigating camps could mean any of several things: terrorists are responsible for the puts on the airline stocks; others besides terrorists had foreknowledge; or, the puts were just lucky bets by credible investors. 41

While not acknowledging the reality of multiple shell corporations set up to conceal the identity of traders, or the fact that some countries don’t cooperate fully with US investigations and routinely — as admitted by Senator Carl Levin’s report on correspondent banking — slip transactions through the cracks, Howard not only confirmed that the trades could be tracked, she flatly contradicted the sworn testimony of the Secretary of the Treasury, Paul O’Neill. The New York Times and Bloomberg dropped the biggest bombshells of all by admitting something we discussed in the chapter on PROMIS software. Although I was not aware of these reports at the time, I had been saying for months in my lectures (during 2001-2002) throughout the US, Canada, and Australia that neither Osama bin Laden nor al Qaeda would have been so foolish as to telegraph their intentions in an environment they damn well knew was watched more closely than grizzly bear cubs by Mama Bear.

Scott Keller, president of DealAnalytics told Bloomberg News, It would seem almost incredible to me that anyone would take the risk of trying to front-run the market on something like this. It would
be a life sentence if they got caught.42

At the New York Times, spinmeisters Eichenwald and Andrews reported, A law enforcement official, speaking on condition of anonymity, also expressed doubt that a trading conspiracy existed. The official said it was unlikely that a terrorist group that had worked for months, if not
years, to orchestrate its attack would be reckless enough to create even a subtle signal of its plans by engaging in the high-profile trading of public securities.43

The trades could only have been made by people high enough in the US, Israeli, and European intelligence communities (including Russia) to know about the attacks and — more importantly — which of many planned attacks were going to be successful. This circle could, of course, have included key world financial and political figures who were implementing a global agenda. As we have already seen, these two camps are one and the same. There is no other explanation that encompasses all the known data, and takes notice of the incredible veil of secrecy that has fallen over the issue.

Evidently, almost all the foreign intelligence services that had penetrated al Qaeda ultimately realized that the US government was going to facilitate the attacks. That knowledge migrated to certain investors who promptly capitalized on it. To have brought these figures to justice would have revealed how much was known about the attacks in so many places before they happened.

Nine agencies — SEC, NYSE, CBOE, Department of Justice, FBI, Secret Service, CIA, Treasury, and the National Security Agency — opened investigations into insider trading immediately after 9/11 based upon initially admitted and obvious evidence that it had, in fact, taken place. Much of the major press immediately recognized the importance of the story and then shirked its obligation to
follow up. Not one of the agencies involved has to this day divulged any information to the public.

All the insanity and depravity suggested by 9/11 insider trading was made clear when the Pentagon announced, and then immediately scrapped, plans for a futures market on terrorist attacks called the Policy Analysis Market. This official program constituted a frank admission that people with advance knowledge of terror attacks would always seek to capitalize on that knowledge.44 Although the outrage over the program forced the resignation of convicted Iran-Contra felon John Poindexter, not a single press story made any connection between the Pentagon’s plans and the trades of September 11th. The CIA is Wall Street. Wall Street is the CIA.