Was September 11, 2001 A Chain of Coincidences, Or Was It Something More Sinister?
Anyone who has paid attention to the fiasco over the last two years with COVID-19 and the authoritarianism that became apparent should be aware that our federal and state institutions are not worth putting faith into. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) changed its standards constantly, while the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) received funding from Big Pharma. The Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and White House are waging a war against right-wing conspiracy theorists and the ultra-MAGA folks; and in the past, we had MK Ultra, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, the internment of Japanese Americans, the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, the Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction lie, and the Gulf War “babies out of incubators” disinformation campaign.
Yet, we are still supposed to be good citizens and obey government demands, without question. The families of the victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks still have not received satisfactory answers with the 9/11 Commission Report, and any attempt to challenge the official narrative is met with labels of “crazy conspiracy theorist” or “unpatriotic whack-job.” In the wake of the January 6th “insurrection” and the FBI raid on former President Donald Trump, some conservatives are actually waking up to the reality that the FBI and other agencies are crooked wings of a deep state controlled by corporate overlords and that they care more about spying and control of the populace than they do about protecting the country.
Even with knowing all of this, will the general public ever be willing to hear out the evidence and critically think about the events of 9-11? Was it an inside job to usher in a massive surveillance and data collection state, the normalization of indefinite detentions and torture, the end of privacy and free speech, drone warfare in any global location, and endless wars that benefit defense contractors (now that Lockheed Martin and others have Ukraine, we can wind down wars in the Middle East)? To those who understand the history of manipulation and the relationship between the elites and their peasantry, the answer may be clearer than it is for others.
Before delving deeper into this question, it should be understood that I do not have all of the answers of what happened that day, nor does anyone. Was there inside trading of airline stocks right before the event? Did World Trade Center Buildings 1 and 2 collapse because of a controlled demolition, being that the towers were specifically designed to withstand hits by commercial aircraft? Did a missile hit the Pentagon, since it would be nearly impossible for even the most experienced pilot to evade the United States’ air defenses and fly that low to the ground to hit the building perfectly? Was Flight 93 shot out of the sky? Did the corporate media announce that World Trade Center Building 7, where several government agencies had offices, was collapsing before the tower started to fall? How did the black box of the planes get destroyed or go missing, but the passport of one of the hijackers was left undamaged and conveniently located where it could be found by investigators? Regardless of who murdered the nearly 3,000 Americans and the thousands of other first responders who were dispatched, we should still be angry and sad by what transpired. It was an act of terrorism, and we the people should put pressure on officials to reveal all of the details of that day.
I hear many times that conspiracy theories are false because nobody could keep a secret for that long, but in a highly compartmentalized system of government, people involved would only know bits and pieces of the puzzle and enough to do their job. Having served in the military with a secret clearance, I can attest to the fact that you would only possess enough knowledge to perform a few tasks on a “need-to-know” basis, and everything else involving your job as a whole would be unknown. So, the idea that 9-11 could not have been carried out as an inside job because thousands of employees would not be able to keep a secret is preposterous, and plus, look at how the Edward Snowden leaks of National Security Agency (NSA) data collection and spying took about twelve years to surface.
People are often turned away from 9-11 conspiracy theories because they could not possibly comprehend why the government would have motivation to kill its own people and commit such an atrocity. Yet, we have documented proof that the government would do just that. It was called Operation Northwoods of 1962, and it entailed false-flag military operations created by the Department of Defense (DoD), the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to hijack aircraft and swap them with missiles to strike targets, sink civilian ships, falsify enemy documents, blow up civilian strategic points of interest, kill refugees, and stage fires on military bases. These actions would then be used to gain public support for a war against Cuba, giving American officials the ability to overthrow the Castro regime. Although the plans were halted by President John F. Kennedy (who was later assassinated), the fact that proposals such as these exist is frightening. If government attacks against citizens were planned once, they certainly could be planned again.
Operation Northwoods in no way proves that elements within our federal government committed acts of terror against the populace in 2001, but when this is factored in with things that were going on around that time, you should start to wonder. In fact, two months prior to the attacks, President George W. Bush was already working out plans to eradicate al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and declare war on the Taliban, if it refused to hand over Osama bin Laden; and he was preparing to declare a worldwide war against terrorism on September 9, 2001. Lucky for the president, he did not have to look like a pre-emptive invader, because he got his wish of an attack against Americans and justification for war just days later.
It was reported in 2004 that the real-world invasion of Afghanistan was directly modeled after the pre-9-11 plans, and President Bush’s prepared threat against the Taliban ended up coming into fruition when the effective Afghan government refused to obey his demands to hand over Osama bin Laden. However, the organization did unsuccessfully offer to have the terrorist “mastermind” tried in an Islamic court in Afghanistan, if the United States could provide evidence of his involvement. After about one week of bombing, the Bush administration rejected the Taliban’s second deal of handing Osama bin Laden over to a neutral country (not subject to influence of the United States) in exchange for proof that the former American ally was responsible for the 9-11 attacks. Playing from a position of strength (this is not hard when you have superior weaponry pointed at a weaker foe), President Bush’s response was, “There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty.” Well, if you know that he is guilty, Mr. President, what is the harm in providing evidence? Could it be that there is none? I mean, bin Laden did deny responsibility up until a potentially fabricated video recording seemed to show him flip-flop on the issue (some suggest that the videos showing bin Laden were not actually him and that the government released fake footage).
So basically, if Bush had not been so arrogant, a twenty-year war in Afghanistan and subsequent wars throughout the Middle East, as well as the spying on American citizens, could have been avoided. If the administration’s true intentions were to have bin Laden tried and convicted, why would it not attempt to negotiate a peace agreement with the clearly reasonable Taliban? Instead, we are left with the conclusion that the war had always been intended to happen, and Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were going to have their war, one way or the other. It is too much of a coincidence that the justification for the war fell on the White House’s lap just days and weeks after the plans were concocted.
It is certainly a bit suspicious how the heavily-funded intelligence apparatus of the United States government somehow allowed nineteen radical Muslims (who did not shy away from strip clubs, pornography, or a Western way of life) to evade the most powerful defense system in the world and murder almost 3,000 Americans. The official story was that there were gaps in the intelligence systems, but if that were the case, what were Americans even paying for in the first place? Why would taxpayers want to fund something that sucks up so much money but is so incompetent?
This argument also does not hold water when you consider that the CIA was tracking two of the hijackers that were known to be al-Qaeda operatives (they came to the United States in 2000 without issue), and the agency intentionally withheld that information from the FBI (and actually blocked the transferring of it). These hijackers were traced back to senior members of the government of Saudi Arabia (and to its embassy in the United States), and Saudi Arabia has been accused of being a huge contributor to al-Qaeda itself. State Department officials and the CIA also pressured Saudi Arabia to issue passports to dubious individuals potentially linked to terrorism, which cleared the way for the hijackers to be able to gain entry to the United States (yes, the CIA allowed the hijackers to come to the United States). At least President Barack Obama’s decision to keep Saudi Arabia’s role in 9-11 shielded was thwarted, and the voices of the victims’ families were able to successfully get Congress to override the veto, thus opening the door to lawsuits against the kingdom.
The Israeli government and its Mossad (intelligence agency) have also been accused of being additional funders of the 9-11 attacks, and although it may be hard to swallow, the endless wars in the Middle East benefit Israel greatly. Having the American military reducing the Knesset’s enemies and paving the way for Israel’s dominance in the region are invaluable services.
In addition, the Saudi-funded PTech, which provided software to the FBI, DoD, House of Representatives, Secret Service, Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), had known links to al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. The FBI was notified of the terror connections, but it did nothing to seriously investigate the situation. Therefore, the company potentially had unobstructed access to top-level systems and could manipulate and threaten aspects of our national security (like maybe gain access to weaknesses that could then be exploited?). So, was it that 9-11 was an intelligence failure, or were the terrorists permitted to attack the United States and essentially given the blessing to do so?
Interestingly, whistleblower Indira Singh, who testified against PTech, showed a then-active relationship between the CIA and other elements of the American government, the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), the Saudi government, and radical Muslim terrorists; and this company was used to covertly funnel money between all of them. This means that the CIA was potentially funding Muslim terrorists, including the hijackers on 9-11 (this may prove that the United States never actually stopped funding Osama bin Laden). Were some of the unaccounted $2.3 trillion that Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld had declared missing on September 10, 2001 part of a black ops budget to fund the 9-11 hijackers (and then conveniently, the Pentagon was hit, and there was no longer any proof of what it was used for)? Could this explain why the agency wanted to keep its knowledge secret and not have its plans hindered by inquiring members of the government? Was the CIA one of the main culprits behind 9-11, and did it use radical Muslims as tools for an agenda?
If this seems farfetched, do not forget that former head of the ISI, Mahmoud Ahmed, ordered Omar Sheikh to wire the lead hijacker, Mohammad Atta, $100,000. Ahmed was reported to have visited the United States right before the hijacking, and he met with George Tenet (head of the CIA), as well as officials in the White House and Pentagon. Additionally, the CIA and FBI had ignored reports of al-Qaeda agents being sent into the United States by the direction of Khalid Sheikh Mohammad (a Pakistani and the alleged architect of the 9-11 attacks), and they both tried to cover this up and put gag orders on those attempting to testify. If the CIA was secretly funding the ISI, which was a supporter of al-Qaeda, it is no wonder that it has kept its involvement under wraps.
In the months leading to 9-11 and up until the actual day, exercises, such as the North American Aerospace Defense Command’s (NORAD) Vigilant Guardian and Fertile Rice, were being practiced, which simulated the hijacking of commercial aircraft and flying them into buildings. So, of course, when President Bush and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice claimed that there was no way that the federal government could have envisioned this type of scenario, it was as ridiculous as Governor Andrew Cuomo suggesting that they could not have known how unprepared they were to fight a coronavirus pandemic, right after New York was a participant in the Crimson Contagion drill. The exercises conducted by the DoD, NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS), and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had striking similarities to what happened in real life, so could the hijackers, who were handed access to information and computer systems of several agencies (remember PTech?), including of the military and FAA, have picked that day, by the suggestion of the CIA, because they knew that the exercises would confuse the military and the whole defense structure? It was reported that the military struggled to make sense of the events, due to the exercises being conducted on the same day as the real incident, and even military members in communication with the FAA and NORAD had to ask, “Is this real-world or exercise?”
Were these exercises coincidental, or was the confusion deliberate to allow the hijackers free reign of the skies? Based on what we know from the CIA’s involvement, it would seem that the simplest explanation would be that there was manipulation that paved the way for the attacks, because otherwise, you are forced to explain away every coincidence for an event that benefited government officials and members of the intelligence community (who gained control of the population without regard for the Constitution) and defense corporations (which made large profits off of the subsequent wars). If this was just a chain of hundreds of coincidences, why were there none that were positive or that hindered the actions of the hijackers? Is that not statistically impossible (if the events were accidents, the hijackers would have coincidentally ran into some kind of issue in their plan, right?)?
Was 9-11 a perfect storm, with terrorists being so crafty that they could exploit every possible intelligence and defense vulnerability known to the government, or was there something more sinister going on? According to Indira Singh, fed-up FBI and CIA agents claim that the elite are making the Third Reich look like a “tea party,” but let us continue to live our lives as if nothing is happening. As the Biden administration turns the War on Terror inward, subjecting citizens to the same tools that we were conditioned to accept against radical Muslims, and labels those who question and challenge the narrative as domestic terrorists, we must ask ourselves: how much more government power and abuse can we take? When will we terminate their plans and take back control over our own lives? If ever you wondered how Adolph Hitler was able to pull off a totalitarian regime, which utilized democratic institutions, and commit genocide, creating false-flag operations that can then rally the populace under collectivism and patriotism is how it was done. Our government is now painting truth seeking and critical thinking as conspiracy theories. The out-of-control elements within our own government have been successful, and there is no indication that the plans of the elites are going to halt or fail, so it is up to us to choose our destiny from here.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
Yet, we are still supposed to be good citizens and obey government demands, without question. The families of the victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks still have not received satisfactory answers with the 9/11 Commission Report, and any attempt to challenge the official narrative is met with labels of “crazy conspiracy theorist” or “unpatriotic whack-job.” In the wake of the January 6th “insurrection” and the FBI raid on former President Donald Trump, some conservatives are actually waking up to the reality that the FBI and other agencies are crooked wings of a deep state controlled by corporate overlords and that they care more about spying and control of the populace than they do about protecting the country.
Even with knowing all of this, will the general public ever be willing to hear out the evidence and critically think about the events of 9-11? Was it an inside job to usher in a massive surveillance and data collection state, the normalization of indefinite detentions and torture, the end of privacy and free speech, drone warfare in any global location, and endless wars that benefit defense contractors (now that Lockheed Martin and others have Ukraine, we can wind down wars in the Middle East)? To those who understand the history of manipulation and the relationship between the elites and their peasantry, the answer may be clearer than it is for others.
Before delving deeper into this question, it should be understood that I do not have all of the answers of what happened that day, nor does anyone. Was there inside trading of airline stocks right before the event? Did World Trade Center Buildings 1 and 2 collapse because of a controlled demolition, being that the towers were specifically designed to withstand hits by commercial aircraft? Did a missile hit the Pentagon, since it would be nearly impossible for even the most experienced pilot to evade the United States’ air defenses and fly that low to the ground to hit the building perfectly? Was Flight 93 shot out of the sky? Did the corporate media announce that World Trade Center Building 7, where several government agencies had offices, was collapsing before the tower started to fall? How did the black box of the planes get destroyed or go missing, but the passport of one of the hijackers was left undamaged and conveniently located where it could be found by investigators? Regardless of who murdered the nearly 3,000 Americans and the thousands of other first responders who were dispatched, we should still be angry and sad by what transpired. It was an act of terrorism, and we the people should put pressure on officials to reveal all of the details of that day.
I hear many times that conspiracy theories are false because nobody could keep a secret for that long, but in a highly compartmentalized system of government, people involved would only know bits and pieces of the puzzle and enough to do their job. Having served in the military with a secret clearance, I can attest to the fact that you would only possess enough knowledge to perform a few tasks on a “need-to-know” basis, and everything else involving your job as a whole would be unknown. So, the idea that 9-11 could not have been carried out as an inside job because thousands of employees would not be able to keep a secret is preposterous, and plus, look at how the Edward Snowden leaks of National Security Agency (NSA) data collection and spying took about twelve years to surface.
People are often turned away from 9-11 conspiracy theories because they could not possibly comprehend why the government would have motivation to kill its own people and commit such an atrocity. Yet, we have documented proof that the government would do just that. It was called Operation Northwoods of 1962, and it entailed false-flag military operations created by the Department of Defense (DoD), the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to hijack aircraft and swap them with missiles to strike targets, sink civilian ships, falsify enemy documents, blow up civilian strategic points of interest, kill refugees, and stage fires on military bases. These actions would then be used to gain public support for a war against Cuba, giving American officials the ability to overthrow the Castro regime. Although the plans were halted by President John F. Kennedy (who was later assassinated), the fact that proposals such as these exist is frightening. If government attacks against citizens were planned once, they certainly could be planned again.
Operation Northwoods in no way proves that elements within our federal government committed acts of terror against the populace in 2001, but when this is factored in with things that were going on around that time, you should start to wonder. In fact, two months prior to the attacks, President George W. Bush was already working out plans to eradicate al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and declare war on the Taliban, if it refused to hand over Osama bin Laden; and he was preparing to declare a worldwide war against terrorism on September 9, 2001. Lucky for the president, he did not have to look like a pre-emptive invader, because he got his wish of an attack against Americans and justification for war just days later.
It was reported in 2004 that the real-world invasion of Afghanistan was directly modeled after the pre-9-11 plans, and President Bush’s prepared threat against the Taliban ended up coming into fruition when the effective Afghan government refused to obey his demands to hand over Osama bin Laden. However, the organization did unsuccessfully offer to have the terrorist “mastermind” tried in an Islamic court in Afghanistan, if the United States could provide evidence of his involvement. After about one week of bombing, the Bush administration rejected the Taliban’s second deal of handing Osama bin Laden over to a neutral country (not subject to influence of the United States) in exchange for proof that the former American ally was responsible for the 9-11 attacks. Playing from a position of strength (this is not hard when you have superior weaponry pointed at a weaker foe), President Bush’s response was, “There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty.” Well, if you know that he is guilty, Mr. President, what is the harm in providing evidence? Could it be that there is none? I mean, bin Laden did deny responsibility up until a potentially fabricated video recording seemed to show him flip-flop on the issue (some suggest that the videos showing bin Laden were not actually him and that the government released fake footage).
So basically, if Bush had not been so arrogant, a twenty-year war in Afghanistan and subsequent wars throughout the Middle East, as well as the spying on American citizens, could have been avoided. If the administration’s true intentions were to have bin Laden tried and convicted, why would it not attempt to negotiate a peace agreement with the clearly reasonable Taliban? Instead, we are left with the conclusion that the war had always been intended to happen, and Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were going to have their war, one way or the other. It is too much of a coincidence that the justification for the war fell on the White House’s lap just days and weeks after the plans were concocted.
It is certainly a bit suspicious how the heavily-funded intelligence apparatus of the United States government somehow allowed nineteen radical Muslims (who did not shy away from strip clubs, pornography, or a Western way of life) to evade the most powerful defense system in the world and murder almost 3,000 Americans. The official story was that there were gaps in the intelligence systems, but if that were the case, what were Americans even paying for in the first place? Why would taxpayers want to fund something that sucks up so much money but is so incompetent?
This argument also does not hold water when you consider that the CIA was tracking two of the hijackers that were known to be al-Qaeda operatives (they came to the United States in 2000 without issue), and the agency intentionally withheld that information from the FBI (and actually blocked the transferring of it). These hijackers were traced back to senior members of the government of Saudi Arabia (and to its embassy in the United States), and Saudi Arabia has been accused of being a huge contributor to al-Qaeda itself. State Department officials and the CIA also pressured Saudi Arabia to issue passports to dubious individuals potentially linked to terrorism, which cleared the way for the hijackers to be able to gain entry to the United States (yes, the CIA allowed the hijackers to come to the United States). At least President Barack Obama’s decision to keep Saudi Arabia’s role in 9-11 shielded was thwarted, and the voices of the victims’ families were able to successfully get Congress to override the veto, thus opening the door to lawsuits against the kingdom.
The Israeli government and its Mossad (intelligence agency) have also been accused of being additional funders of the 9-11 attacks, and although it may be hard to swallow, the endless wars in the Middle East benefit Israel greatly. Having the American military reducing the Knesset’s enemies and paving the way for Israel’s dominance in the region are invaluable services.
In addition, the Saudi-funded PTech, which provided software to the FBI, DoD, House of Representatives, Secret Service, Department of Treasury, Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), had known links to al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. The FBI was notified of the terror connections, but it did nothing to seriously investigate the situation. Therefore, the company potentially had unobstructed access to top-level systems and could manipulate and threaten aspects of our national security (like maybe gain access to weaknesses that could then be exploited?). So, was it that 9-11 was an intelligence failure, or were the terrorists permitted to attack the United States and essentially given the blessing to do so?
Interestingly, whistleblower Indira Singh, who testified against PTech, showed a then-active relationship between the CIA and other elements of the American government, the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), the Saudi government, and radical Muslim terrorists; and this company was used to covertly funnel money between all of them. This means that the CIA was potentially funding Muslim terrorists, including the hijackers on 9-11 (this may prove that the United States never actually stopped funding Osama bin Laden). Were some of the unaccounted $2.3 trillion that Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld had declared missing on September 10, 2001 part of a black ops budget to fund the 9-11 hijackers (and then conveniently, the Pentagon was hit, and there was no longer any proof of what it was used for)? Could this explain why the agency wanted to keep its knowledge secret and not have its plans hindered by inquiring members of the government? Was the CIA one of the main culprits behind 9-11, and did it use radical Muslims as tools for an agenda?
If this seems farfetched, do not forget that former head of the ISI, Mahmoud Ahmed, ordered Omar Sheikh to wire the lead hijacker, Mohammad Atta, $100,000. Ahmed was reported to have visited the United States right before the hijacking, and he met with George Tenet (head of the CIA), as well as officials in the White House and Pentagon. Additionally, the CIA and FBI had ignored reports of al-Qaeda agents being sent into the United States by the direction of Khalid Sheikh Mohammad (a Pakistani and the alleged architect of the 9-11 attacks), and they both tried to cover this up and put gag orders on those attempting to testify. If the CIA was secretly funding the ISI, which was a supporter of al-Qaeda, it is no wonder that it has kept its involvement under wraps.
In the months leading to 9-11 and up until the actual day, exercises, such as the North American Aerospace Defense Command’s (NORAD) Vigilant Guardian and Fertile Rice, were being practiced, which simulated the hijacking of commercial aircraft and flying them into buildings. So, of course, when President Bush and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice claimed that there was no way that the federal government could have envisioned this type of scenario, it was as ridiculous as Governor Andrew Cuomo suggesting that they could not have known how unprepared they were to fight a coronavirus pandemic, right after New York was a participant in the Crimson Contagion drill. The exercises conducted by the DoD, NORAD’s Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS), and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) had striking similarities to what happened in real life, so could the hijackers, who were handed access to information and computer systems of several agencies (remember PTech?), including of the military and FAA, have picked that day, by the suggestion of the CIA, because they knew that the exercises would confuse the military and the whole defense structure? It was reported that the military struggled to make sense of the events, due to the exercises being conducted on the same day as the real incident, and even military members in communication with the FAA and NORAD had to ask, “Is this real-world or exercise?”
Were these exercises coincidental, or was the confusion deliberate to allow the hijackers free reign of the skies? Based on what we know from the CIA’s involvement, it would seem that the simplest explanation would be that there was manipulation that paved the way for the attacks, because otherwise, you are forced to explain away every coincidence for an event that benefited government officials and members of the intelligence community (who gained control of the population without regard for the Constitution) and defense corporations (which made large profits off of the subsequent wars). If this was just a chain of hundreds of coincidences, why were there none that were positive or that hindered the actions of the hijackers? Is that not statistically impossible (if the events were accidents, the hijackers would have coincidentally ran into some kind of issue in their plan, right?)?
Was 9-11 a perfect storm, with terrorists being so crafty that they could exploit every possible intelligence and defense vulnerability known to the government, or was there something more sinister going on? According to Indira Singh, fed-up FBI and CIA agents claim that the elite are making the Third Reich look like a “tea party,” but let us continue to live our lives as if nothing is happening. As the Biden administration turns the War on Terror inward, subjecting citizens to the same tools that we were conditioned to accept against radical Muslims, and labels those who question and challenge the narrative as domestic terrorists, we must ask ourselves: how much more government power and abuse can we take? When will we terminate their plans and take back control over our own lives? If ever you wondered how Adolph Hitler was able to pull off a totalitarian regime, which utilized democratic institutions, and commit genocide, creating false-flag operations that can then rally the populace under collectivism and patriotism is how it was done. Our government is now painting truth seeking and critical thinking as conspiracy theories. The out-of-control elements within our own government have been successful, and there is no indication that the plans of the elites are going to halt or fail, so it is up to us to choose our destiny from here.
Thank you for reading, and please check out my book, The Global Bully, and website.
No comments have been added yet.
