Former MI5 Agent Says 9/11 an Inside job

well, seeing as we're back on page one again, amb - i apologize for refering you to a 'sheeple'

so in the case that you've just come across this whole 911 thing, i can completely sympathise with your not taking his 'word' for it. whether hes got the credentials or not, c'mon - hes just one guy. granted. i dont think anybody is gonna bet it all on one MI5 agents word.

and that is why your comment was interpreted as sheeple -ish. pardon me for assuming you were brushing off the whole question of "911insidejob?!" because of one questionable MI5 guy.

however, if you've already fully absorbed the damning evidence taken from the three points ive already brought up, then your comment suggest you've brushed them off too.

what do you make of WTC7, operation Northwoods, and the Downing Street Memo? Are they all misinterpretations, bias and propaganda? Honest mistakes? Coincidences?

go on, rationalize away.......

Better yet, tell me this; what constitutes proof?
dont get me wrong, you're commended for coming here to ATS and investigating. i would have better understood your comment if you had just said the MI5 guy did nothing for the "911insidejob" conspiracy theories.

Lost we were able to go to war on the word of a few people giveing "worst case scenarios".

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

World Trade Center Bombing, February 26, 1993

Yes there is Evidence that this was a governement job.
It is stated that the guy in charge of the attack has a tape recording of the Head of the FBI in NYC I believe cause he was getting scared, or not as ruthless as they wanted him to be.. They paid him 1 million dollars to do this contract.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Oklahoma City bombing, April 19, 1995

I do believe there was something behind in this one also, altho I never got into it but from what I understand is that there was people there that should have been. There were 2 exsplosions instead of 1.. And many witnesses and news reports from that area at the time report FBI or something being there to disgard another bonb that didnt go off... Also the carting away of the building so nobody can examine it kinda like the WTC issue.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
U.S. Embassy Bombings in Kenya August 7, 1998
U.S. Embassy Bombings in Tanzania, August 7, 1998
Attack on U.S.S. Cole, October 12, 2000

I donno you tell me in a story that was in the news the CIA was talking to Bin Laden before 9/11, so in this case I wouldnt be to suprised if they were involved in these

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird
Yeah I guess the Government has been busy. Well, at least we know regular people aren't capable of doing such things.

In all essense that the governement is involved with these acts is I guess proof in the pudding..

There are many things on 9/11 I would like to discuss but as we all know search 9/11 and we will find the same things I am going to say. Therefor in closing I do belive in a jury by thier peers, the Bush/Cheney and Clinton/Gore
crew would be found guilty on all crimes against the american people.

[edit on 6/30/2005 by ThichHeaded]

Originally posted by fritz
How anybody - especially Americans - can think that this was an inside job, and take the accusations of David Shayler seriously, is quite beyond me!

Many of us Americans first knew terror when the Supreme Court put Bush into office.
Those of us who know history, knew we would be at war before the end
of Bush's first term, it was an inevitable with this kind of puppet.

As soon as I saw the burning towers on TV, my very first thought was "inside job, this is the only way Bush can get the war he's looking for and seize middle eastern oil". That was on day one of the event, even as the towers were collapsing. Millions of others shared this feeling with me.

Its much closer to the truth than anything our government has ever stated.

But we will never know the details, since Bush immediately sealed documents, millions of pages of them, in the days that followed. Documents from Reagan and his fathers administration that were due to be disclosed to the public, by law. If it wasn't an inside job, what is he hiding?

Quite agree about 9/11 being, an inside job, thats obvious!

But Shayler is a RAT!!!

I don't think that 9/11 was an inside job. I think they knew something was going to happen, but I don't think it was an inside job. I also don't think the military could have stopped it from happening, contrary to what writers want you to believe. I put a thread about how radar works and some things that happen with interceptions, and things like that so I won't go into detail here, but it would have been hard if not impossible for the USAF to stop any or all of the planes in time. If the Gov't had warned them ahead of time that something was going to happen I could see it, but with no warning, I don't think it could be done.

but vice prez cheney has norad stand down for a good hour or two on the morning of 911?

How the hell can anybody - even that smirking fool you have in the White House - seal millions of files pertaining to what you call in inside job? Why?

Because no matter how tight security is, no matter how tough restraining or 'gagging' orders are, no matter whether physical force is threatened or used, SOMEBODY would blow the whistle, and the perpetrators would have been ripped to pieces (hopefully)

9/11 is just too big to keep under wraps and to continually suggest that the 'powers that be' would be party to such an act (within the continental USA that is - not a problem anywhere else in the world!) is an insult to those who lost their lives and an even bigger insult to the extraordinarily brave firemen and firewomen who gave their lives.

Get real people - see beyond the myth. There are those, even in these hallowed pages, who have their own agenda. Their ignorance begats rumours, rumours begat doubt, doubt turns to fear and fear is the 'key' to control.

Act like men. Stand tall. If you support crazy Bush fine - no problem. But if you don't, tell your fellow countrymen and explain why. Get together. Act together and hopefully you'll be able to impeach him for his crimes.

Rumours of rumours about who might have done this or those people have done that, only provide fuel and fan the flames of doubt. What does doubt do?

"There is also the fact that NORAD-Northeast was conducting war game exercises that morning, a fact that has been very little talked about and certainly not reported to the general public. What's also not been reported, according to the information that I have, at least one of the scenarios they were considering in their war game exercises concerned hijacked aircraft being crashed into buildings. Now, this could explain the lack of response when the air traffic controllers began to report that four planes were off course..."

Why didn’t the F-15’s accelerate to mach 1.5 or higher?

The F-15 is not CAPABLE of flying supersonic with external fuel tanks and missiles besides the ones along the fuselage. It can go into the transonic range, which is 500 mph or so. If it drops the pylons and goes supersonic, it has about half an hour to 45 minutes of internal fuel at that speed. No aircraft is capable of supersonic flight carrying a full load of external stores. It creates too much drag. It would take more fuel than they carry for them to accellerate to supersonic speeds.

www.prisonplanet.com...

Notice the number of bases that were actually on alert during 9/11. SEVEN. There were SEVEN bases with armed fighters ready to launch.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

See my thread on radar and interceptors. It explains more in detail about why the USAF wouldn't have been able to intercept them in time, even if they launched when the first transponder failed.


When the first transponder failed, NORAD would NOT have automatically assumed it was a hijacking. There are other things that could cause a transponder failure. Malfunction of the transponder, electrical malfunction of the airplane, crash of the airplane, midair explosion etc. By the time all four transponders were off, they only would have had a general idea of where to even START looking for the planes. Until they got close to a radar antenna they would have had a hard time tracking them. 80-85% of radars in the US are CIVILIAN radars. They are meant to track a TRANSPONDER, NOT an actual airplane. They would have had to vector the interceptors into an AREA where the transponder failed, then the interceptors would have had to use their onboard radars to try to find them. By the time they could, IF they did, they probably wouldn't have had enough fuel to catch them. Not only that, but until 9/11 every hijacked plane, with the exception of like 3 or 4 had been landed and demands made. There was no reason to think it was any different on that day.

And that's my take on the NORAD "stand down".

Wow, thats quite some research, Zaphod

Mind you did you know that Cheney was Commander In Cheif on the day of 9/11......He had direct control over NORAD, due to the "apparant" war game exersizes.....................

Crossing the Rubicon

(...)

Means - Dick Cheney and the Secret Service: Dick Cheney was running a completely separate chain of Command & Control via the Secret Service, assuring the paralysis of Air Force response on 9/11. The Secret Service has the technology to see the same radar screens the FAA sees in real time. They also have the legal authority and technological capability to take supreme command in cases of national emergency. Dick Cheney was the acting Commander in Chief on 9/11.

(...)

Opportunity - 9/11 War Games: The Air Force was running multiple war games on the morning of 9/11 simulating hijackings over the continental United States that included (at least) one "live-fly" exercise as well as simulations that placed "false blips" on FAA radar screens. These war games eerily mirrored the real events of 9/11 to the point of the Air Force running drills involving hijacked aircraft as the 9/11 plot actually unfolded. The war games & terror drills played a critical role in ensuring no Air Force fighter jocks - who had trained their entire lives for this moment - would be able to prevent the attacks from succeeding. These exercises were under Dick Cheney's management.

(...)

Richard Clarke writes in Against All Enemies: "I was amazed at the speed of the decisions coming from Cheney and, through him, from Bush." This is to be expected. Everything was in place for the Commander in Chief to be calling all the shots as the 9/11 plot unfolded, but Bush was in an elementary school reading about goats with Secret Service agents right beside him.

I would love to know how Bush gave the command when he was at a school and how he managed to see the first plane hit, before entering the classroom but while he was reading a book, an SS agent approches him and tells him the first plane hit, then time passed, he was approched again to be told about the second hit and the US is under attack........Yet he tells the American public he saw the first plane hit..................My question is how could he??? When he was outside the classroom NOTHING had been hit..................Questions, questions, questions.........

peace

[edit on 1/7/05 by Hunting Veritas]

I'm trying to say something, and I know what it is, I just can't figure out HOW to say it. It's the end of a long day with very little sleep last night, so I'll figure it out tomorrow and post it after I get some sleep.

Oh, and I found a little bit that you might find interesting about NORAD and interceptions.....

"Authority is granted Commander in Chief, NORAD (CINCNORAD), to operate interceptors subject to the conditions and in compliance with the responsibilities and standard operating procedures set forth in this Section and Appendix 16. In cases where interceptors operate under AFIO and deviate from an ATC clearance, it must be emphasized that a National Security threat assessment dictates a higher assumed risk level so that a successful intercept occurs."

www.faa.gov...

Authorization to intercept aircraft comes from NORAD. They launch the interceptors, and THEN notify higher authority after the intercept is underway, or even after the intercept is complete. This is so that if a hostile force is inbound, they aren't sitting there going "What do we do now!" because they can't get in contact with higher authority. CINCNORAD decides if they are going to launch. He is the man on the spot when it comes to deciding to launch or not.

Secret Service has the legal authority to take supreme command over all agencies in the United States in time of a national emergency on U.S. soil. Even the Air Force recognizes Secret Service supremacy.

Secret Service has the highest technological communication systems of any agency in the U.S. - as it should.

On 9/11 Secret Service had the technology to see FAA radar screens in real time.

Secret Service was in the decision-making loop as early as 8:15am on 9/11, no later than 8:45am.

Everything was in place on 9/11 for the Commander in Chief to have full supreme control of the Air Force via the Secret Service communication systems and legal mandate to take supreme command.

However, Bush was reading about goats in Booker Elementary School. Secret Service was within arms' reach, and they chose to keep him there as the 9/11 plot unfolded. Bush's Secret Service detail was in full communication with Cheney's Secret Service agents in the PEOC (Presidential Emergency Operations Center) as the 9/11 plot unfolded.

Dick Cheney was the acting Commander in Chief on 9/11 and Secret Service was the supreme command.

Now if the US was really under attack, wouldn't the president be swept away and stashed in a secret underground bunker......Cheney was so why wasn't the President......

An unknown individual or command center referred to by Major Don Arias of NORAD as the "maestro" coordinated the war games. It is possible there was more than one maestro, but no one will name names. FTW has asked this question of everyone in relevant government and military positions, to no avail. Our investigation has found the maestro was either Dick Cheney, General Ralph "Ed" Eberhart, or both.

Whoever was coordinating the Air Force war games was under the management and direction of Dick Cheney, who was also in charge of managing a terror drill being set up on the West Side of downtown New York on 9/11 titled Tripod 2. This exercise set up a command and control center on 9/11 that was configured exactly like the one lost that morning in WTC 7. It was the perfect command center to respond to the crisis, and it was under Dick Cheney's management before the hijackings occurred. How convenient.

hmmmmm.......nothing fishy there .

Originally posted by Hunting Veritas
I would love to know how Bush gave the command when he was at a school and how he managed to see the first plane hit, before entering the classroom but while he was reading a book, an SS agent approches him and tells him the first plane hit, then time passed, he was approched again to be told about the second hit and the US is under attack........Yet he tells the American public he saw the first plane hit..................My question is how could he??? When he was outside the classroom NOTHING had been hit..................Questions, questions, questions.........

Here is a verbatim transcript of the two references he makes regarding the watching of the plane hit.

"I was sitting outside the err **stutters a bit** classroom waiting to go in and I saw an airplane hit the tower **stutters a bit** the TV was obviously on, I used to fly myself, I said there is one terrible pilot and err it said it must have been a horrible accident"

In Plane Sight - Statement
Student: What was the first thing that went through your head when you heard that a plane crashed into the first.....**kid mumbles**

Mr Bush: Well, I was sitting in a school house in Florida, I'd gone down to tell my little brother what to do, and er **audience laughs** just kidding Jeb, **audience laughs** and err, it's the mother in me, anyway err, I err, I was sitting there and my chief of staff - well first of all when we walked in the classroom I had seen this plane fly into the first building, there was a TV set on, and err, you know I thought it was pilot error.

Please read below for the alleged sequence of events regarding Bush receiving the news.

The morning of 9/11
8:46am When Flight 11 hits the WTC at 8:46 a.m., President Bush's motorcade is crossing the John Ringling Causeway on the way to Booker Elementary from the Colony Beach and Tennis Resort on Longboat Key.

Seismic records pinpoint the crash at 26 seconds after 8:46 a.m.



8:55am President Bush's motorcade arrives at Booker Elementary School for a photo-op to promote his education policies. Captain Deborah Loewer, director of the White House Situation Room, is traveling in President Bush's motorcade toward Booker Elementary School, when she learns of the first WTC crash from her deputy in the Situation Room at the White House. According to some reports, as soon as the motorcade reaches the school, Loewer runs from her car to Bush's car, and informs Bush.

9:00am Sarasota elementary school principal Gwen Tose-Rigell is summoned to a room to talk with President Bush. She recalls, “He said a commercial plane has hit the World Trade Center, and We're going to go ahead and go on, We're going on to do the reading thing anyway.”

9:01am President Bush later makes the following statement: “And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower—the television was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, ‘There's one terrible pilot.’ And I said, ‘It must have been a horrible accident.’ But I was whisked off there—I didn't have much time to think about it.” He has repeated the story on other occasions. Notably, the first WTC Crash was not shown live on television. Further, Bush does not have access to a television until 15 or so minutes later.

9:03am Flight 175 hits the South Tower of the World Trade Center (Tower Two). Seismic records pinpoint the time at six seconds before 9:03 a.m.

9:03am - 9:06am President Bush enters Sandra Kay Daniels' second-grade class for a photo-op to promote Bush's education policies.

Numerous reporters who travel with the president, as well as members of the local media, watch from the back of the room.

Altogether, there are about 150 people in the room, 16 of whom are children in the class. He is introduced to the children and poses for a number of pictures. The teacher then leads the students through some reading exercises (video footage shows this lasts about three minutes).

Bush later claims that during this lesson, he is thinking what he will say about the WTC crash. “I was concentrating on the program at this point, thinking about what I was going to say. Obviously, I felt it was an accident. I was concerned about it, but there were no alarm bells.”

The children are just getting their books from under their seats to read a story together when Chief of Staff Andrew Card comes in to tell Bush of the second WTC crash. According to the Washington Times, Card comes in at the conclusion of the first half of the planned lesson, and “[seizes] a pause in the reading drill to walk up to Mr. Bush's seat.”

A Boston Herald article later notes, “Think about that. Bush's remark implies he saw the first plane hit the tower. But we all know that video of the first plane hitting did not surface until the next day. Could Bush have meant he saw the second plane hit—which many Americans witnessed? No, because he said that he was in the classroom when Andrew Card whispered in his ear that a second plane hit.” The article, noting that Bush has repeated this story more than once, asks, “How could the commander in chief have seen the plane fly into the first building—as it happened?”

The 9/11 Timeline

[edit on 1-7-2005 by Koka]

Dick Cheney would have been in charge of the EXERCISE, but real world intercepts are dictated by CINCNORAD, or whoever is in the commanders chair at the time. NORAD was set up to react first, talk second. If they took the time to ask first, then by the tme they reacted it would be too late. When it comes to defense, NORAD is as close to independant as you will see in a military command. They are in control of the warning systems, then they issue warnings to all the commands in the military. The TIMING of the exercise is "interesting" to say the least, but as far as the NORAD stand down, I don't think it happened. I think that someone with just enough knowledge to think they know better, put 1+2 together and got 4. I've seen it in several articles lately about the military and aircraft used by the military.

Given the proximity of the Bush cavalcade, was he the intended target?

Let's face it, any large aircraft requires a larg turning circle and once committed to it's 'target' there's no going back.

Perhaps the terrs got their intel wrong and thought Bush was going to the WTC. One aircraft could have done the job, two is overkill.

Just a sudden thought that popped into my head after seeing your map.

Think about that. Bush's remark implies he saw the first plane hit the tower. But we all know that video of the first plane hitting did not surface until the next day. Could Bush have meant he saw the second plane hit—which many Americans witnessed? No, because he said that he was in the classroom when Andrew Card whispered in his ear that a second plane hit.” The article, noting that Bush has repeated this story more than once, asks, “How could the commander in chief have seen the plane fly into the first building—as it happened?”

Now there's a contradiction if I've ever heard one

[edit on 1/7/05 by Hunting Veritas]

proof of deciet if nothing else. check the defending argument;

"honest mistake! ~more rationalizations~ accident oops! ~rationalizations~"

these kind of discrepencies should not go unpunished. mistakes, doubt it - but even honest mistakes must deal with consequences. to those naysayers amongst us, I must say, if you have absorbed the situation at all similar to the way i have and you're still defending this administration, then you have crossed a line of reason by me.

innocent till proven guilty sounds all and good, but what constitutes proof nowadays? better yet, what constitutes proof of guilt for the prezident?

by the skeptics standards, proof no longer exists. PROOF that is.

its one thing to deny ignorance and demand proof with a certainty. if the circumstantial evidence has not brought you that certainty, and you are still looking for the smoking gun, well 911 was in 2001, and we're fast approaching 06;

the smoke has long disapatted. if you're still rationalizing the hundreds of discrepencies to the official 911 story, than my heart goes out to you, because you suffer from a denial that will effect more than just your voting record. the truth really does hurt, and im sorry for those of you still dealing with the pain -

the world did a nice little 180 on you, and i understand its difficult coping. but the truth remains the truth:

bush=forknowlege. no matter how you cut it, thats treason.

Originally posted by lost
well, seeing as we're back on page one again, amb - i apologize for refering you to a 'sheeple'

so in the case that you've just come across this whole 911 thing, i can completely sympathise with your not taking his 'word' for it. whether hes got the credentials or not, c'mon - hes just one guy. granted. i dont think anybody is gonna bet it all on one MI5 agents word.

and that is why your comment was interpreted as sheeple -ish. pardon me for assuming you were brushing off the whole question of "911insidejob?!" because of one questionable MI5 guy.

however, if you've already fully absorbed the damning evidence taken from the three points ive already brought up, then your comment suggest you've brushed them off too.

what do you make of WTC7, operation Northwoods, and the Downing Street Memo? Are they all misinterpretations, bias and propaganda? Honest mistakes? Coincidences?

go on, rationalize away.......

Better yet, tell me this; what constitutes proof?
dont get me wrong, you're commended for coming here to ATS and investigating. i would have better understood your comment if you had just said the MI5 guy did nothing for the "911insidejob" conspiracy theories.

what constitutes proof? a VALID and RELIABLE source that has VALID and RELIABLE people backing him/her up. not just cockamamy internet threads with hypthosis.

i never ever said that i did NOT believe that 9/11 was a massive conspiracy of any kind.

all i said was that i did NOT believe this man to be reliable enough for me to believe his claims............because i didn't agree with you ........you automatically ASSUMED that i was SHEEPLE.

as far as WTC7..........i dunno. makes absolutely no sense to me how it could have fallen in conjunction to towers I and II. i have read alot of the information on WTC7 ............and am still forming my thoughts on it.

i haven't read about the downing street memo nor the northwoods thing you refer too. i have seen the threads and will go examine.

however.........i have been a very curious, openminded reader of all things 9/11 since that horrible day occurred.............i have worked my way through website after website trying to grasp all of what happened..........the architecture of the towers, the planes,the terrorists,the eye witness accounts..were there bombs in the towers, were there missles that struck the towers, were there unmanned drones that flew in....i don't KNOW.... i have followed time line after time line and i STILL haven't formed a solid opinion.

there's just too much information to grasp........and the concept that MY gvmt actually set the whole thing up and killed its own citizens in the name of OIL and redeeming the bush family name is just so beyond comprehension to me????

if someone would have asked me if i could even CONSIDER that concept 4yrs ago i would have laughed hysterically............but the more i read i am becoming more open to the different theories that abound.

i don't know the answer............but i'm reading and learning. i'm on the fence and that's about all i can commit too in this discussion.

angie

[edit on 1-7-2005 by amb1063]

You get a better view when your on the fence, when you commit to oneside you can never see all the picture, unfortunately it can make for a harder life, as you can be pulled or pushed from either side.

Out of all that I have read and seen regarding 9/11, Bush's statement regarding what he saw before entering the classroom, is the one that has impacted on me the most.

Real Question Why have I not seen this picked up and scrutinised by the media?

Edit: Apologies, I realise I am hijacking this thread by pursuing my question, so if you are serious about this particular incident, I think it best it takes place in my original thread.

Damning Evidence for 9/11 Conspiracy

My personal opinion on Shayler, he knows stuff, but not about 9/11.

[edit on 1-7-2005 by Koka]