RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Excerpt: "As we sought to clarify how the CIA had handled information about the hijackers before 9/11, we found a half dozen former government insiders who came away from the Sept. 11 tragedy feeling burned by the CIA, particularly by a small group of employees within the agency's bin Laden unit in 2000 and 2001, then known as Alec Station."

President George W. Bush, Condoleezza Rice and George Tenet in The Oval Office, October 2001. (photo: Eric Draper/The White House)
President George W. Bush, Condoleezza Rice and George Tenet in The Oval Office, October 2001. (photo: Eric Draper/The White House)

CIA's Account of 9/11 Under Attack

By Rory O'Connor and Ray Nowosielski, Salon

16 October 11

growing number of former government insiders - all responsible officials who served in a number of federal posts - are now on record as doubting ex-CIA director George Tenet’s account of events leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. Among them are several special agents of the FBI, the former counterterrorism head in the Clinton and Bush administrations, and the chairman of the 9/11 Commission, who told us the CIA chief had been “obviously not forthcoming" in his testimony and had misled the commissioners.

These doubts about the CIA first emerged among a group of 9/11 victims' families whose struggle to force the government to investigate the causes of the attacks, we chronicled in our 2006 documentary film "Press for Truth." At that time, we thought we were done with the subject. But tantalizing information unearthed by the 9/11 Commission’s final report and spotted by the families (Chapter 6, footnote 44) raised a question too important to be put aside:

Did Tenet fail to share intelligence with the White House and the FBI in 2000 and 2001 that could have prevented the attacks? Specifically, did a group in the CIA's al-Qaida office engage in a domestic covert action operation involving two of the 9/11 hijackers, that - however legitimate the agency’s goals may have been - hindered the type of intelligence-sharing that could have prevented the attacks? And if not, then what would explain seemingly inexplicable actions by CIA employees?

As we sought to clarify how the CIA had handled information about the hijackers before 9/11, we found a half dozen former government insiders who came away from the Sept. 11 tragedy feeling burned by the CIA, particularly by a small group of employees within the agency's bin Laden unit in 2000 and 2001, then known as Alec Station.

Among them was Gov. Thomas Kean, co-chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, which was responsible for investigating 9/11. He agreed to an on-camera interview for our documentary in 2008. He surprised us by voicing many doubts and questions about the CIA’s actions preceding Sept. 11 - and especially about former CIA director George Tenet.

Four years after Tenet testified to the commission, Kean said the CIA director had been “obviously not forthcoming” in some of his testimony. Tenet said under oath that he had not met with President Bush in the month of August 2001, Kean recalled. It was later learned he had done so twice.

Did Tenet misspeak? we asked the New Jersey Republican.

“No, I don't think he misspoke,” Kean responded. "I think he misled."

A Tale of Two Hijackers

The story buried in footnote 44 of Chapter 6 of the 9/11 Commission report was this:

The commission became aware in early 2004 of a warning written by Doug Miller, an FBI agent working inside the CIA’s Alec Station. In January 2000, Miller tried to inform his bosses about a man named Khalid Al Mihdhar, who had previously been identified as a member of an al-Qaida operational cadre. By the spring of 2000, the CIA had learned that Mihdhar and another suspected al-Qaida operative, Nawaf Al Hazmi, had likely arrived in Southern California. But the CIA did not pass along the information to the FBI.

The draft cable - blocked by Miller’s CIA superiors - was not turned over to the commissioners or to the earlier congressional investigation. It was discovered in CIA records by an investigator working for a concurrent inquiry conducted by the Justice Department’s inspector general. Apparently it had been missed by Tenet’s DCI Review Group, convened immediately after the attacks to examine CIA records in order to prepare the director for the coming government investigations.

Kean was disturbed by the revelation.

“The idea that that information was left out of something that was so essential for the FBI, whose job it is to work within the United States and track these people … you know, it’s one of the most troubling aspects of our entire report, that particular thing," Kean said.

We pushed Kean. Could it be this was a simple mistake, a failure to recognize the significance of Mihdhar and Hazmi, as the CIA had initially characterized it?

“Oh, it wasn’t careless oversight,” Kean replied. “It was purposeful. No question about that in my mind … In the DNA of these organizations was secrecy.”

Mihdhar and Hazmi boarded American Flight 77 at Washington Dulles airport on the morning of Sept. 11. After the plane took off, they joined three other men in commandeering the aircraft and flying it into the Pentagon, killing a total of 184 people.

So how then had George Tenet and those responsible at the CIA managed to get away with misrepresenting the incident as a mistake for so long?

"Tenet was a likable guy,” Kean concluded. “He got away with some stuff because people liked him.”

“Malfeasance and Misfeasance"

In 2009, former White House counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke took the scenario further. In an on-camera interview he suggested that Tenet, once a close friend and colleague, had ordered the withholding of the information about the two al-Qaida operatives from the FBI and from the White House.

Clarke explained why he had come to that remarkable conclusion. Tenet, he said, followed all information about al-Qaida “in microscopic detail” and would call Clarke at the White House several times a day to share “the most trivial of information.” In addition, there were terrorism threat meetings held in person every other day.

We must have had dozens, scores of threat committee meetings over the time when they knew these guys had entered the country … They told us everything except this … So now the question is, why?

The only explanation Clarke could offer was admittedly speculative: that the CIA may have been running an operation to recruit the two al-Qaida operatives while they were living under their own names in Southern California. This might appear to have been a reasonable thing for the CIA to do. After all, Bill Clinton's White House had long complained to the agency about the lack of penetration agents in al-Qaida.

But if the CIA was following or recruiting or monitoring Mihdhar and Hazmi in the United States, that might well have qualified as operating on U.S. soil, a violation of the agency's charter. Once the two men were identified as hijackers on Flight 77, CIA officials may have begun a coverup of their earlier “malfeasance and misfeasance," as Clarke charges.

His language is blunt, especially for a national security policymaker.

“I am outraged and have been ever since I first learned that the CIA knew these guys were in the country,” explained Clarke. “But I believed for the longest time that this was probably one or two low-level CIA people who made the decision not to disseminate the information. Now that I know that 50 CIA officers knew this, and they included all kinds of people who were regularly talking to me, saying I’m pissed doesn’t begin to describe it.”

Clarke said he assumed that “there was a high-level decision in the CIA ordering people not to share that information.” When asked who might have issued such an order, he replied, “I would think it would have been made by the director,” referring to Tenet - although he added that Tenet and others would never admit to the truth today “even if you waterboarded them.”

The view from the FBI

We found the same suspicion was also prevalent among FBI counterterrorism agents from the time, particularly those who had worked under a legendary FBI agent named John O’Neill in New York. O’Neill, movingly portrayed in Lawrence Wright's Pulitzer Prize-winning "The Looming Tower," was one of the special agents in charge of counterterrorism in the FBI’s New York office. He retired to serve as chief of security at the World Trade Center and was killed in the Sept. 11 attacks, only three weeks after leaving the bureau.

O'Neill's deputy for counterterrorism was Pasquale D’Amuro, who was appointed inspector in charge of the FBI’s investigation into the attacks.

“I am cautious about saying it, because you have to deal with the facts,” D'Amuro told us. He said that he was told that Richard Blee, the chief of Alec Station, and his deputy, Tom Wilshere, had blocked the sharing of intelligence on Mihdhar and Hazmi with the FBI.

"I had heard that Blee stopped it from coming over, that Blee and Wilshere had had the conversation and stopped it,” D’Amuro said. “There’s no doubt in my mind that that went up further in the agency than just those two guys. And why they didn’t send it over - to this day, I don’t know why.”

Jack Cloonan, former manager at the FBI’s al-Qaida-busting I-49 Squad, is another insider pained by the CIA's actions.

“If you start to look into everything that’s Khalid Al Mihdhar and Nawaf Al Hazmi, you can’t help but conclude to most people’s minds that this is it,” Cloonan, said during an emotional interview in his New Jersey living room. “9/11 occurred not because the systems failed. The systems actually worked. Somebody made a critical decision not to share this information … If you look at this, it’s really just a handful of people. I don’t know how they sleep at night, I really don’t."

The CIA's failure to inform the FBI meant that a last chance to stop the hijackers was missed, says Clarke.

“And if they had….” Clarke told us, his voice trailing off. “Even as late as Sept. 4," he went on, "we would have conducted a massive sweep. We would have conducted it publicly. We would have found those assholes. There’s no doubt in my mind - even with only a week left - we would have found them…"

Clarke is not an infallible or even a disinterested witness. As a top counterterrorism adviser at the time of the attack, he cannot help but take the tragedy personally. That said, the fact that at least three FBI agents share his views certainly enhances his credibility.

A spokesman for the CIA rejects the notion, telling Salon, "any suggestion that the CIA purposely refused to share critical lead information on the 9/11 plots with the FBI is simply wrong." The spokesman cited the 9/11 Commission report and a report of the CIA's independent inspector general. (The latter study, completed in 2004, has never been made public.)

The story of the alleged CIA intelligence failure attracted little other media interest until this August. That’s when Tenet, Richard Blee and another CIA official criticized by Clarke, Counterterrorism Center director J. Cofer Black, replied to our request for an interview. We had asked them to respond to Clarke's speculation.

Although they declined to be interviewed, Tenet, Black and Blee sent us a joint written statement that charged Clarke was “reckless and profoundly wrong” and that he had “suddenly invented baseless allegations which are belied by the record and unworthy of serious consideration.”

The statement, which we shared with the Daily Beast, was newsworthy because the three men had never before felt the need to explain their actions directly to the American public.

“We testified under oath about what we did, and what we didn’t know," they stated. "We stand by that testimony.”

The relevance of their testimony to Clarke's theory is hard to assess. Tenet and Black were never asked about the surveillance of Mihdhar and Hazmi, at least in their public testimony. Blee's testimony has never been made public.

"You’re Not Going to Say Anything"

The CIA's explanation is not convincing to Mark Rossini, an FBI agent who was assigned to Alec Station in 2000 and 2001. The assignment of tracking Khalid Al Mihdhar, he told us, had been given to a young staff operations officer who shared responsibility for watching events in Yemen along with Alec Station deputy chief Tom Wilshere.

Rossini, who resigned from the FBI in the wake of legal troubles, recalled in a phone interview that the staff officer's direct supervisor was a redheaded analyst working directly for Wilshere. He says that this supervisor, not referred to by even so much as an alias in any of the government reports on 9/11, is the same woman who told congressional investigators that she had hand-delivered Mihdhar’s visa information to FBI headquarters. This was later proven false when the investigators checked the log books at the FBI headquarters, discovering that she had never set foot in the building. Eleanor Hill, staff director of the congressional inquiry, also told us that her investigators found no evidence that the FBI had ever received the information.

Rossini remembered that the staff operations officer working under that redhead had ordered him and his fellow FBI agent Doug Miller not to tell their colleagues at the bureau, including John O'Neill's New York office, that Mihdhar was likely on his way to the United States in early 2000.

"She got a little heated," Rossini recalled. "She just put her hand on her hip and just said to me, ‘Listen, it's not an FBI case. It's not an FBI matter. When we want the FBI to know, we’ll let them know. And you’re not going to say anything.’"

Only two days before, this same officer had sent a message internally throughout the CIA misleading her fellow agents into believing that the information had been passed on to the FBI. Her later conversation with Rossini makes it appear that this was a deliberate misstatement. According to the Justice Department inspector general, she sent the misleading message only hours after posting an electronic note on Doug Miller’s draft warning to the FBI: “pls hold off … for now per [the CIA deputy chief of bin Laden unit]," a reference to Tom Wilshere.

We now know the staff officer is a woman named Michael Anne Casey. Her red-haired supervisor was a woman named Alfreda Frances Bikowsky.

Google penetrates the CIA

How we learned the names of those two CIA personnel can be summarized in one word: Google. In the case of the redhead, an Associated Press article from February 2011 seemed to refer to her. She had also been referenced in Jane Mayer’s book "The Dark Side," by her middle name, Frances. The AP article stated that she had an unusual first name. After searching State Department nominations from the past decade - often cover positions for CIA personnel but still entered into the Congressional Record -– a contemporary historian named Kevin Fenton with whom we work closely found a name that seemed to fit.

For the staff officer, we knew three important facts. She had a “man’s name" - most likely Michael, the name used in the Commission Report. She was in her late 20s at the time of the incident, and was a “CIA brat,” meaning she had at least one parent or another family member inside the agency. We wondered if she might be related to a prominent CIA figure, as her boss Richard Blee had turned out to be. One of the first names that came to mind, given her probable birth year, was William J. Casey, Ronald Reagan’s CIA director.

Pairing the first name “Michael” with the last name “Casey,” we found a number of people with that name working in State Department or military positions. Again looking in the Congressional Record, we found the name Michael Anne Casey - a woman with a man’s name - and another website listing Casey as 27 years old in 1999 and living in the D.C. area, which seemed to make her very likely the person in question. (Incidentally, we were later informed that she is no relation to William J. Casey.)

A CIA Threat

When we informed the agency's Public Affairs office that we planned to release an investigative podcast on iTunes on Sunday, Sept. 11, that named Bikowsky and Casey, the agency replied immediately.

“We strongly believe it is irresponsible and a potential violation of criminal law [emphasis added] to print the names of two reported undercover CIA officers who you claim have been involved in the hunt against al-Qaida," said spokesman Preston Golson.

Erring on the side of caution, we took the names out of our podcast. On the day we released the revised podcast on our website, we heard from Sibel Edmonds. A former FBI analyst and prominent whistleblower, Edmonds posted a story on her blog Sept. 21 stating that she had three credible sources and a document confirming that the redhead in our revised story was Bikowsky. She also stated that the staff officer involved was Michael Anne Casey and cited our website, Secrecy Kills. It was only then that we discovered our webmaster had briefly and inadvertently placed our entire email to the CIA on our site. Edmonds saw the information and published it.

Within minutes the information had spread widely through social media on the Internet. Before long Gawker breathlessly announced the latest of the CIA's problems: that Bikowsky, who had risen to become the head of the CIA's global jihad unit, had been outed. The rather more significant story - that a CIA intelligence failure had contributed to the 9/11 attacks - got short shrift from the popular gossip site.

In an effort to clarify the story, we asked the CIA two factual questions. We asked if Bikowsky's statement to the congressional 9/11 inquiry - that she had delivered Mihdhar's visa information to the FBI prior to the attacks - was accurate.

We also asked if former FBI agent Mark Rossini's recollection that Michael Anne Casey had told him not to report information about Mihdhar and Hazmi was accurate.

The agency did not address the specifics of either question.

“We do not, as a rule, publicly confirm or deny the identities of currently serving agency officers," a spokesman replied. "That includes those dedicated to the disruption of terrorist plots. The officers involved in those critical efforts have, thanks to their skill and focus, saved countless American lives."

The story of Mihdhar and Hazmi could easily be clarified, says Robert Baer, a retired CIA officer in the Middle East who worked directly with some of the people involved.

"A lot of these people who withheld this information were not covert operatives," he explained. "There was no reason to hide their names. They are out there in the public. You can find them in data and credit checks and the rest of it … They certainly could have been brought before the House or the Senate in closed session and an explanation and a report put out there."

Langley on the Defensive

The CIA prefers not to disclose but to protect the handful of people at the heart of this story.

Tenet remained George W. Bush’s CIA director for another two and a half years, where he was famously involved in passing along faulty intelligence about weapons of mass destruction that justified the disastrous invasion of Iraq. On Dec. 14, 2004, George Tenet was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Bush.

Richard Blee, chief of Alec Station in 2001, reportedly took over the CIA operation during the invasion of Afghanistan to capture or kill Osama bin Laden when bin Laden was surrounded in the mountains of Tora Bora three months after 9/11. According to 23-year career CIA officer Gary Berntsen, as reported in his book, "Jawbreaker," Blee was in charge at the time bin Laden managed to slip away to Pakistan to live comfortably for nearly a decade. Harper's Ken Silverstein reported that Blee was active in the controversial renditions and detainee-abuse programs. He is now retired and living in Los Angeles.

We do not know exactly what became of Tom Wilshere, a mysterious figure who has managed to maintain an even lower profile than the rest. Dale Watson, former head of the FBI's Counterterrorism Division, told us that us that Wilshere became a White House briefer during the Bush era.

Casey and Bikowsky have risen in the CIA’s ranks, despite the fact that Bikowsky has been associated with at least one major blunder. The AP reported that Bikowsky was at the center of "the el-Masri incident,” in which an innocent German citizen was renditioned (a euphemism for kidnapped) by the CIA in 2003 and held under terrible conditions (a euphemism for tortured) in a secret Afghan prison. The AP characterized it as "one of the biggest diplomatic embarrassments of the U.S. war on terrorism." It was no doubt something more to Khaled el-Masri. Despite that episode Bikowsky was promoted.

As chief of the counterterrorism center, Cofer Black was the boss of Casey, Bikowsky and Blee. He too was associated with the abuses of the extraordinary rendition program. He resigned shortly after George Bush was elected to a second term. Black then served as vice chairman of Blackwater USA, the controversial U.S.-based private security firm, from 2005 to 2008. Earlier this month Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney announced that Black would join his campaign as a foreign policy adviser. your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

-28 # Uranus 2011-10-16 20:39
Sibel probably doesn't remember me, but I used to contribute to Luke Ryland's blog, who she called her best student. If she does, she knows I've been watching this closely a long time.

The more I hear about terrorists and all the specific, exotic-named people, the funnier it gets. What happened 9/11 had nothing to do with all that. The information in this story is a diversion, and it's irresponsible.

There is just one correct version, and you'll find it here:

I live in Oklahoma county. I've heard every media and street story about Murrah's destruction in 1995. But, the only correct version of it is here:

Who are the terroists now? The same people who make those pretty crop circles and modify the weather. They owe for the money damage caused by their mischief, and have the money to pay. The insurance industry ignores it, because insurance people are shy and, after all, it's only money.
+12 # minkdumink 2011-10-17 17:08
I wouldnt believe anyone who says the CIA told the truth.They have never told the truth,they have been involved in so much criminal activity,they dont even know what the truth is.
+4 # Uranus 2011-10-17 21:11
Look at my review rating tank! Marc and friends, thank you for sharing my comments. In the recent past, you haven't wanted to go down the road of exploring alternate theories of these tragedies.

But, the official version remains unsatisfying. I was astonished how on the tenth anniversary of 9/11 the MSM version remained unchanged from the day it happened, and the day after.

It is so much to your credit that you understand the importance of robust discussion that goes in all possible directions.

Because Lockerby, OKC and 9/11 all have disintegration in the visually observable physical evidence, the use of EM weapons is undeniable. That's been very hard for me to swallow. I haven't wanted to think it, didn't want to learn about it, or act on it. I had a personal axe to grind, and this is a side effect.

RSN, you are the best friend America ever had.
+2 # Anarchist 23 2011-10-19 18:29
Considering Hani Hanjour, the alleged pilot of the 'plane' that crashed into the Pentagon could not even fly a single engine Cessna (Marcel Bernard-55 Freeway airport-google it) all this stuff about 'AL Qaeda operatives' is just a bunch of 'legend' work-these pathetic people had nothing to do with it. OTOH-if the 'official history' is right-we are in a lot more trouble than we think-since hydrocarbons cannot melt titanium/steel jet engines let alone vaporize a whole plane so these people must have been using powerful magic. Harry Potter may have been fiction-but Voldemort and his Death Eaters apparently exist! 911-shock and awe inside job to destroy the USA and replace it with the GSA (Geheim Staats of Amerikkka).
-40 # teachpeace 2011-10-16 22:06
Hey rsn,

We know this article is very misleading, so why are you posting his garbage?
+3 # Uranus 2011-10-17 21:14
They're catching on is why! It's very good.
+26 # Erdajean 2011-10-16 22:26
A fascinating piece of the puzzle. One only fears that the puppeteers behind the whole thing will continue to get by with it, until death carries them off. What we DO know is that the ludicrous official "explanatory" fantasy forced upon us, probably already composed and waiting for the action, was unbelievable by anybody with half a brain, and to say so was perilously "unpatriotic." When we look at what the detestable authors of that plan have done to the country, and the world, we feel rather kindly toward them. I mean, the rougher the justice, the more even us gentler folks will applaud it.
+16 # Erdajean 2011-10-16 23:09
Forgive Error -- "We feel rather UNKINDLY toward them," for goodness'sake!
In any event, the idea that we were SUPPOSED to believe that arrogant claptrap -- or else! -- is just more than some of us can swallow. My heart is with the families of those murdered in the towers, to whom the lies, and the liars, must be just about unbearable.
+59 # Regina 2011-10-16 22:35
For these kinds of power plays and spite tricks 3000 people died. Sickening. And the miscreants never learn. Disgusting. And they all think they're great patriots. Abhorrent. Above all, they never change their M.O. Outrageous. And for this disservice we the people pay. Nauseating. And the worst of them is the highest-up. Will WE ever learn? Our "Security" operations are a ghastly joke. The administration needs to clean out its sewers of power. But I won't hold my breath.
+10 # soularddave 2011-10-17 00:21
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm a bit of a BSer myself, but go on with the story.

This info is interesting, but it will be dissected by many others and fit into the timeline. We already know enough to prosecute many people, but we need to get to where there are real hearings, with oaths and cross examinations of witnesses.

Why not?
+23 # badbenski 2011-10-17 01:37
I wonder if the mid to low level investigators & case officers, who know in their hearts that something's not kosher, will abandon the belief that the problem is merely bureaucratic ball dropping and butt covering and begin to come to terms with reality of the true crimes committed that September morning? I would imagine that some have, and having done so are frozen with fear, realizing that in the face of such ruthless audacity their lives are of no real consequence and their protestations would likely result in their being crushed like insects. I am still hopeful that among them are some whose moral outrage and righteous indignation might cause them ro rise above their )(very real) fears. On such a day the threads of a vast fabric of lies might start to unravel and a flood of truth, from behind covert doors, may come pouring forth. One can only hope.
+34 # Ralph Averill 2011-10-17 02:39
Tenet had unreported meetings in the White House. With whom? I smell Dick Cheney, the master manipulator.
+6 # tm7devils 2011-10-17 11:07
Ya think! If there was a GSR type test for "fingers in dirty pies" Cheney would test positive up to his elbows! It's hard to distinguish whether he is "a"moral or "im" either case I would consider him a traitor by even the loosest definition of the term.
I say waterboard him, and Tenet, until every dirty, little secret is seen in the light of day - and go from there!
+19 # Rita Walpole Ague 2011-10-17 04:22
RSN, what courage and determination you and yours show in fostering good and outing the evil that's overtaken us. You set us all an example in unending need for truthtelling.

How long do you suppose it will be 'til your ability to educate us and our ability to comment (a.k.a. free press, freedom of speech and net neutrality) is quashed under the guise of the Patriot Act?
+28 # futhark 2011-10-17 04:59
Just another example of "The Audacity of Dopes". The powers behind 9/11 rolled the dice for big stakes and have not yet stopped celebrating their propaganda victory in quashing all truly objective inquiries as to what happened.

I'm hoping that the OWS movement will spark some skepticism about the orthodox propaganda explanation of the crime of the millennium and a demand for a real investigation by parties not serving on corporate boards of directors.
+5 # larrypayne 2011-10-17 05:38
I agree with teachpeace. Any article that supports the official conspiracy theory in any way is intentionally misleading.
+23 # walt 2011-10-17 06:13
Might this very article stimulate someone in our government to DEMAND a full investigation into all that happened before and after 9/11 to include the invasion of Iraq based on lies?
Or will we just sweep more catastrophe under the same carpet as we did with Vietnam?
If folks are lacking faith and trust in government, have a good look why!
+16 # jbell94521 2011-10-17 08:43
Even more important than investigating what the various government agencies did or did not do with the "intelligence" they had would be to investigate who in the U.S. government actually participated in 911. The basic laws of physics make clear that 911 was an indside job. That has been proven over and over again. Now it just remains to be seen who was responsible for this murderous, illegal, traitorous false-flag operation. This has never been adequitely investigated. It will happen again unless we get to the bottom of it.
+18 # RLF 2011-10-17 06:41
One small thing that disgusts me is that the children of the CIA end up running the CIA. Nepotism kills! When you are promoted because Daddy says so, not on talent, it destroys effectiveness.
+10 # Dick Huopana 2011-10-17 08:34
President Bush presented George Tenet with the a much deserved Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian award. But, why weren't the other heroes of his administration similarly awarded? Surely, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, Powell, Karl Rove, Alberto Gonzales, et al deserve to be honored for their roles in almost protecting us from the 9/11 terrorist attacks - and, yes, definitely from Iraq attacking us with weapons of mass death and destruction.

President Obama should act to correct Bush's oversight and recognize all the aforementioned with medals for
their....well, for whatever reason Tenet was honored.

And, yes, Bush himself should also be awarded with a special (much heavier and larger) Medal of Freedom in recognition of his outstanding performance as Torturer-in...o ops, I mean Commander-in-Ch ief.
+4 # readerz 2011-10-17 10:11
You have to put a sarcasm warning on this, even though it is obvious sarcasm. Of course, there is already a prescribed "reward" for treason on the books. It just needs to be applied (get rid of Holder and get a real Attorney General, but wait, the Senate Rules require 60 votes to approve appointments to Cabinet positions, so that those small states that have more Senators than Representatives can lord it over the rest of us even more. And also, wait, who sits in charge of the highest court of the land?)
+4 # Dick Huopana 2011-10-17 12:22
Besides a sarcasm warning , I also need to warn that my previous comment also has a perhaps confusing - but unintended - word in the first sentence. Hint: It is a sarcastic-free word that should only appear once in the sentence :-)
+4 # in deo veritas 2011-10-17 10:25
Your sarcasm is duly noted and appreciated. Let's see how many browsers don't get it.
+16 # wantrealdemocracy 2011-10-17 08:35
All this talk about the Muslim terrorists is off point. Yes, the CIA, FBI and the Pentagon had some people they were setting up to be the patsys of the destruction of the World Trade Center that set off the many wars for oil all over the world. Who are these 19 Muslim men that the official report claim were responsible? If they were on those planes why were there no Muslim names on the passenger list?

Those buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. Forget the Muslim man hunt and focus on the facts of those buildings collapsing at free fall speed.
+3 # karenvista 2011-10-18 23:41
Quoting wantrealdemocracy:
If they were on those planes why were there no Muslim names on the passenger list?

Those buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. Forget the Muslim man hunt and focus on the facts of those buildings collapsing at free fall speed.

I also noted that there were no Muslim men's names on the passenger manifests released by the airlines. When people started to notice that the filght manifests started to disappear from the MSM websites. I have copies of them though in my binders of information collected over the years.

Also, keep in mind that nano-thermite explosives have been found throughout the WTC sites and samples in the dust from there contain micro-spheres that have been positively identified in scientific peer reviewed arlticles in Europe. No one has come forward to challenge the identification of the expolsives. Also, nano-thermites can only be manufactured by advanced military sources, not men in caves.
+14 # jbell94521 2011-10-17 08:38
Unless you believe that the U.S. government not only can suspend the rule of law whenver it wants to, but can also suspend the basic laws of physics, also at will, you know the official collapse story is hogwash. It is a total fabrication. The possibility that the plane impacts and relatively low-temperature fuel fires caused the THREE buildings to collapse, (remember 3 buildings only 2 plane impacts), is zero. That is unless the laws of physics somehow don't apply. If you have the courage and want the truth check out anonymousphysic ist dot com
+22 # John Locke 2011-10-17 09:28
The real question, since all the players were promoted and Tenent gave false information about would lend support to a realization that the 9-11 attack was a knowing planned event to get us into war, if you recall in 2000 the economy had slipped into a recession and the predominant neoconservative mindset has been to use war to stimulate the economy... just putting 2 plus 2 together and what comes out smells rotten...
+15 # readerz 2011-10-17 09:36
Let's draw the lines between the "dot to dot" puzzle.
Tenent speaks privately with the White House a couple of times, while not allowing the F.B.I. to stop Al Quaida. So, the questions is, "Does he or doesn't he" tell the story to Condi, W, et al? Of course, YES. In "Farenheit 911," Michael Moore points out that Condi Rice had a report on Al Quaida terrorism BEFORE 9/11 that was a strong warning, that supposedly was not passed along. The important dot in this puzzle is that there WAS a White House bureau on counter-terrori sm which got detailed reports more than once a day. Why? Because Condi Rice ignoring a report on Al Quaida, as "Farenheit 911" shows, was not just the top people ignoring a report about a street gang in a small town, but the very top people ignoring a report about the VERY PEOPLE that they had a special unit to MONITOR more than once a day for MORE THAN A YEAR. I'm sorry that I'm shouting, but to me, this is clear evidence that these people were told. Maybe Tenet didn't do it, but that report in Condi Rice's hands that we see in "Farenheit 911" together with a bureau in charge of ONE THING is clear evidence of ignoring (at best), or even instigating, these attacks. Can we say (speaking of nepotism), Skull and Bones? Yes, Daddy Bush had a direct connection to CIA, etc.
-10 # readerz 2011-10-17 10:20
The buildings were put together with little pins connecting each floor to an exoskeleton. These buildings would have fallen in a hurricane; they just needed those pins to wear out with metal fatigue, and the buildings swayed constantly with New York City's constant 30 mph ocean breezes. (My husband worked there in the 1980s; I remember being seasick when visiting him.) Yes, a plane fire with jet fuel would have taken them down, and the heavy quake of the impact would have taken more buildings down, such as the church next door that collapsed. BUT, it is easier to connect the dots to show that W, Rice, Tenet, et al, not only knew, but instigated these attacks through planes and terrorists, both to start a war and to spread hate. If we start looking for explosive devices etc., we make our argument that much more difficult to believe. You realize just how hot jet fuel gets, and at what temperature steel gets soft, don't you? It is much safer to build with oak, that doesn't bend at high temperatures. You are implying that Coney Island's steer pier didn't bend and fall over in a fire either.
-11 # uglysexy 2011-10-17 11:09
You're right readerz....thes e and other modern buildings are very cheaply made. The reason noone makes a big deal out of this aspect of their construction is that they don't want to be held accountable for this flimsy style of construction. That's it....end of story.
-9 # uglysexy 2011-10-17 11:11
This story is full of What Ifs meant to imply that the CIA was ordered to help Cheney et al conduct a false flag operation or at least to allow Terrorist in to do something that would permit the Iraq invasion and other war profiteer feeding frenzies to go forth.
In reality it does no more than to show that jealousies between bureaucracies and myopia ...prevented information, that wasn't all that sinister seeming before the fact, to be shared.
+5 # karenvista 2011-10-18 23:56
[quote name="readerz"] What happened? Did someone from Cheney's office get to you between posts and threaten your life?

If you actually believe anything you said in your second post you need some remedial help-and you obviously aren't an architect.

Go to: That's Architects & Engineers for 911 truth

This is why they don't agree with the Official Conspiracy Theory, and neither do I.

What actually happened at WTC 1, 2 & 7

1.Destruction proceeded through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
2.Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
3.Extremely rapid onset of destruction
4.Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
5.Multi-ton steel sections were ejected laterally
6.Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
7.Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-lik e clouds
8.1200-foot-diameter debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
9.Isolated explosive ejections 20–40 stories below the demolition front
10.Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
11.Several tons of molten metal were found under all 3 high-rises
12.Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
13.Evidence of explosives found in dust samples
+2 # Anarchist 23 2011-10-19 18:40
Sorry Readerz-those buildings had a central core of 47 steel box girders with 3 sealed off sections to floors above and below in the stairwells to prevent 'chimney effect' if they caught fire. Also the building was constructed to sway with the winds and be flexible but it also had 237 steel columns on the outside-it was not a flimsy structure with a hollow core as FEMA and PBS/Nova described it. Furthermore Martini who designed it designed it to stand the impact of a 707, the largest plane of its day and comparable today in weight and dimension to the plane that struck it. Finally jet grade kerosene does not burn hot enough to melt the 100,000 tons of steel in each building, particularly not the fireball on tower 2 which fell first, goes mostly outside the building.sorry- it was not a matter of 'little pins'-that is just part of the fable.
+7 # genierae 2011-10-17 14:20
It seems to me that the CIA has no oversight and pretty much runs roughshod over the whole globe. I don't think that they listen to presidents or the military and we need to remember that President Kennedy was planning to take them down, right before he was murdered. The CIA is a very powerful organization and the question is can any uprising by the people, such as OWS have any affect on it? We must accept the fact that we will encounter massive retaliation and we must be prepared to settle in for the long haul and be ready for suffering and sacrifice.
+12 # fredboy 2011-10-17 15:54
The 9/11 attack was never thoroughly investigated.
+2 # PiscesCurveUS 2011-10-19 08:31
Was the Gulf of Tonkin incident,
Quoting fredboy:
The 9/11 attack was never thoroughly investigated.

Truman's rationales for Korea,
geo-polit. events leading up to the 'unprovoked' Pear Harbor,
the sinking of the Lusitania,
the blowing up of the USS Maine?

'The CIA has more fiction writers than a book-of-the-mon th club'.

Why were they structurally demoted in 2002-03?

These are OUR PUBLIC servants, and we are not their serfs!
+6 # Stephen Pitt 2011-10-17 17:29
To every CIA employee and asset: You swore an oath. That means if you witness or suspect illegal activity-partic ularly in areas inappropriate to the functionality of democracy at the national security level, report it...outside the Agency. Avoid Mueller's FBI and go for the jugular: the press. Put the People back in power. Remove authoritarianis m from our shores. Be vigilant and courageous.
+5 # readerz 2011-10-17 20:39
I almost agree, but "the Press" isn't "the Press" anymore. Info has to be leaked to organizations that will actually publish and publish widely. "The Press" is more likely to SUPpress.
+3 # futhark 2011-10-19 05:24
The "Press" is an embedded propaganda dispensing mechanism for the plutocratic oligarchy and all of its stories and conclusions need to be treated with skepticism.
+1 # belljp 2011-10-17 17:49
no matter what Kean said in 2008 video, ; you have to look at individual Pub lic meetings ,to see that the jokes were on us . the worse possible investigation was ,the 12th Public Meeting ,June 17, 2004 . the last two sessions ,which should have been held FIRST. FAA & MILITARY ; FOCUS on Sliney and Belger ;watch the commissioners and the whiffle balls they throw. It was one big F JOKE.
-5 # readerz 2011-10-17 20:37
Nowhere did I imply that the flimsy buildings would fall by themselves; they would need a hurricane or a jet plane. The heat from burning jet fuel is very hot; steel does not need to break, only become soft and bend to cause a catastrophe. It would take a major accident, bomb, or jet plane to cause this in a short period of time; it might have taken a couple hundred years without the collisions. The hurricane we worried about was Gloria; back then we were told that the 180 mph winds could knock down the WTC, but for some reason the winds lifted into the upper atmosphere, and sent rains into drought areas upstate and east of NYC. But even then, people weren't that worried, and there were several reports to state that (at that time) wind wasn't much of a problem. But jet fuel had been planned in Paris to take down the Eiffel Tower, and was a known problem. Who knew, why our very own gov't., of course. It is far easier to fly a plane full of fuel than to place a lot of demolition charges around a building that people work in day and night, including during the construction phase. You imply that the Ironworkers Local union who risked their lives to save others (and now suffer lung diseases) were involved in the plot when the building was built. No, it was George, Condi, George, Dick, George, and a number of people with funny names.
+1 # Anarchist 23 2011-10-19 18:50
Fact Check Readerz-the melting point of steel is 1,538 Celsius,or 2,800 Fahrenheitaltho ugh it will weaken and buckle at somewhat lower temperatures. But the absolute maximum that can be achieved with hydrocarbons, such as the kerosene-like mixture used for jet fuel is 825 Celsius or 1,517 F-unless the mixture is pressurized or pre-heated ...which in this case it could not be." W G Tarpley-
You may have noticed that the towers were smoking-black smoke? that indicated the fire is not burning well-no heat. Furthermore if things had just bent-the building should have fallen over-not exploded in dust with pyro-clastic force , dust that was extremely fine. and what about the molten metal, brought up weeks after the collapses-still molten? Google that and then try to convince yourself that the 'official history' is correct.
0 # mjc 2011-10-18 12:16
Think we are still missing many pieces of the puzzle and perhaps why the information sharing between agencies never took place, even after 9/11. Saw nothing in the article about a woman named Rowley..???, FBI I think who did try to alert government officials about what seemed to her to be a plot. And there is no mention of the flying lessons Atta and others took in Venice, Florida. One wonders if they were myths. But think there was a real inter agency "competition?" going on and that was acknowledged. To think any of the actors in this tragedy could have allowed self-promotion or perhaps more sinister...atta cks on the US to bring us into a war state...only makes some of us wonder if this country is under an even bigger threat, an internal threat.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.