TREASON?
Commentary on a NY Times article on 9-11
by Jared Israel [posted 15 September 2001]
Note: We published this analysis September 15th. Not a word has
been changed in the text. We think the issues raised here have
not been answered. Please let us know what you think.
-- John Flaherty emperors1000@aol.com
[Emperor's Clothes has published a series documenting the U.S.
Establishment's involvement in 9-11. A list of these articles
has been added at end.]
=======================================
"Police radio broadcasts 'This was a terrorist attack. Notify
the Pentagon.' 9:08 a.m."
('Daily News' (New York), 12 September 2001, NEWS SECTION; Pg.
24: THE TRAGIC TIMELINE, our emphasis)
[Emperor's Clothes note: This was after the first and second
planes had struck the WTC Towers. The third plane is said to
have hit the Pentagon 35 minutes later, at 9:43 am.
"In Sarasota, Fla., Bush was reading to children in a classroom
at 9:05 a.m. when his chief of staff, Andrew Card, whispered
into his ear. The president briefly turned somber before he
resumed reading. He addressed the tragedy about a half-hour
later. " ['AP' 12 September 2001, our emphasis]
"President Bush listened to 18 Booker Elementary School second-
graders read a story about a girl's pet goat Tuesday before he
spoke briefly and somberly about the terrorist attacks."
--Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 12 September 2001 Pg. A20
HEADLINE: 'Bush hears of attack while visiting Booker'
[Emperor's Clothes note: The school was Emma E. Booker
Elementary School in Sarasota, Fla.]
We are not soothsayers.
We cannot say with certainty what happened September 11 - that
is, what really happened, behind the scenes.
But the following report from the semi-official 'N.Y. Times'
makes it clear that either Americans are being lied to by the
those in the highest places - which if true has the gravest
implications - or else the rulers of Washington's New World
Order are criminally negligent.
In analyzing the 9-11 nightmare, we were puzzled by the official
response to the so-called third plane. That is the one that left
Dulles Airport, flew to Ohio, near the West Virginia and
Kentucky borders, turned around, flew back to Washington and
struck the Pentagon.
Concerning this plane, we asked: how could it stay in the air,
hijacked, for almost an hour after two other hijacked planes had
struck the WTC Towers, and not be seen by U.S. air defense
forces? How could it fly to the Midwest, turn around and fly
back to Washington and hit the Pentagon without being spotted
and therefore intercepted?
The 'N.Y. Times' published the following explanation:
"During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 was
under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the
west side of the Pentagon, military officials in a command
center on the east side of the building were urgently talking to
law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to
do.
"But despite elaborate plans that link civilian and military
efforts to control the nation's airspace in defense of the
country, and despite two other jetliners' having already hit the
World Trade Center in New York, the fighter planes that
scrambled into protective orbits around Washington did not
arrive until 15 minutes after Flight 77 hit the Pentagon."
( 'N.Y. Times,' Sept. 15, 2001)
This explanation makes matters worse.
If it was difficult to believe that the third plane was not
spotted, then it is a good deal harder to believe that it was
spotted and tracked for over half an hour and yet nothing was
done because officials "didn't know what to do."
Why didn't they force the plane down and failing that, shoot it
down? Before you think, "Because, as the article says, they
didn't have a procedure for handling such an occurrence," note
the following comment from deputy defense secretary Wolfowitz.
Talking about the fourth plane, the one that crashed in
Pennsylvania:
"Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary, said today that
the Pentagon had been tracking that plane and could have shot it
down if necessary; it crashed about 35 minutes after the
Pentagon crash." ('N.Y. Times, Sept. 15, 2001)
"Could have shot it down if necessary."
If they "could have shot" down the fourth plane, why did they
not shoot down the third? Once they knew these were suicide
hijackings - and surely they knew that by around 9:00 am - why
would they wait?
And why, if they really were confused about what to do, why,
after the Commander in Chief was informed about what was
happening, didn't he immediately convene an emergency meeting to
discuss the issue? Why did he keep reading to children and
listening to stories about goats while the 3rd plane flew
towards Washington?
Officials knew the first and second planes had hit highly
visible symbols of US power. They knew this third plane was
heading back to Washington. Couldn't they be reasonably sure
that the target was a symbol of US power in Washington? Then why
didn't they fully evacuate the Pentagon?
The White House has tried to confuse the issue regarding this
question. They claim the Plane changed course - that originally
it was heading for the White House:
"Top government officials have suggested that American Airlines
Flight 77 was originally headed for the White House and possibly
circled the Capitol building." (CBS News, Sept. 21, 2001,
http://www.cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,310721-412,00.shtml)
But according to CBS, this is not the case:
"CBS News Transportation Correspondent Bob Orr reports that's
not what the recorded flight path shows." (ibid.)
Says CBS:
"Eight minutes before the crash, at 9:30 a.m. EDT, radar tracked
the plane as it closed to within 30 miles of Washington. Sources
say the hijacked jet continued east at a high speed toward the
city, but flew several miles south of the restricted airspace
around the White House.
"At 9:33 the plane crossed the Capitol Beltway and took aim on
its military target. But the jet, flying at more than 400 mph,
was too fast and too high when it neared the Pentagon at 9:35.
The hijacker-pilots were then forced to execute a difficult high-
speed descending turn.
"Radar shows Flight 77 did a downward spiral, turning almost a
complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-
half minutes.
"The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it's clear there
was no fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver
suggests the hijackers had better flying skills than many
investigators first believed.
"The jetliner disappeared from radar at 9:37 and less than a
minute later it clipped the tops of street lights and plowed
into the Pentagon at 460 mph." (ibid.)
The White House denies this:
"At the White House Friday, spokesman Ari Fleischer saw it a
different way.
"That is not the radar data that we have seen," Fleischer said,
adding, "The plane was headed toward the White House." (ibid.)
If the White House is right and CBS is wrong, why did
the 'Times' report that:
"During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 was
under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the
west side of the Pentagon, military officials in a command
center on the east side of the building were urgently talking to
law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to
do." ('N.Y. Times,' Sept. 15, 2001)
Given the stories from CBS and the 'Times,' and given that the
plane did in fact hit the Pentagon, aren't the news reports more
believable than the White House denial?
And since in any case there could be no way of being absolutely
sure where the plane would strike, why weren't all the most
sensitive buildings evacuated to prevent:
"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Up to 800 people may have died Tuesday when
a hijacked commercial airliner was crashed into the Pentagon,
officials said.
"Firefighters were still battling a fire on the west side of the
29-acre, 6 million-square-foot building late Tuesday, more than
12 hours after the crash. Washington hospitals reported 71
people injured, some severely, and another 100 to 800 were still
listed as missing and possibly dead late Tuesday. " (CNN at
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/pentagon.terrorism/)
And why wasn't this plane, the third plane, forced down or
failing that, shot down?
Regarding the fourth plane:
"Asked if rules of engagement would have allowed the Air Force
to shoot the plane down, [deputy defense secretary] Wolfowitz
said: 'I think it was pretty clear at that point that that
airliner was not under the pilot's control and that it was
heading to do major damage.'
"He said any military intervention would have ultimately been
the decision of President George W. Bush....
"Forty minutes passed between the time New York's second World
Trade Center tower was struck and another commandeered plane
crashed into the Pentagon..."
* Washington Post, 15 September 2001, http://emperors-
clothes.com/articles/indict/wps15.htm#a
A) Officials knew that the third plane, and quite possibly the
second, was set to strike important targets.
B) They tracked the third plane for at least half an hour.
C) Supposedly George Bush, Jr. needed to approve shooting the
plane down.
D) But instead of going into an emergency meeting, he continued
his visit to an elementary school, hearing about goats.
What we have here is either criminal negligence beyond belief,
and that includes the Commander in Chief, who hearing that
planes are destroying the country focuses on goats, or b)
the 'N.Y. Times' piece is repeating a cover story whose purpose
is to explain away the obvious flaw in the original story:
namely, that a plan could be hijacked in Ohio, and fly all the
way back to Washington without being spotted.
And if the 'N.Y. Times' story is a lie, then those who fed
the 'Times' this lie are guilty of conspiracy. They are people
in high places and they are directly involved in the murder of
God knows how many people in N.Y. as well as the 800 casualties
the media speaks of in Washington either because they planned
these attacks, perhaps working through Islamist groups secretly
controlled by the CIA or they knew the attacks were going to
happen and wanted to let them happen. The obvious motive: to
create a seeming justification for extreme military action. And
that is why they did not allow the Air Force to stop possibly
the second and certainly the third planes.
So there you have it - either criminal negligence, including Mr.
Bush who reads about goats while his countrymen are slaughtered,
or treason.
Given these amazing facts, available in the mainstream media,
why is there no call for an investigation?
Mr. Bush has called for bringing those responsible to justice.
Let us begin at home.
- Jared Israel
To read the 'N.Y. Times' article quoted above, see:
'AFTER THE ATTACKS: SKY RULES; Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But
Found No Way to Stop It,' at http://emperors-
clothes.com/news/15.htm