Por Ben Bartee
***
I recently penned an article about Tucker Carlson’s musings over the mysterious collapse of Building 7.
Building 7, also known as the Salomon Brothers building, was not struck by an airplane or any such projectile that day. Nonetheless, it collapsed at free-fall speed neatly into its own footprint.
Anyone who’s ever seen a controlled demolition will recognize the kinetic pattern.
Predictably, I was attacked by a few disgruntled readers/trolls with the “conspiracy theorist” smear.
Fair enough. That 9/11 was either actively facilitated or passively allowed by the powers that be is a conspiracy theory, and it’s one that I subscribe to.
I bear the cross with joy.
Have such detractors ever sincerely grappled with the endless anomalies and curiosities surrounding the event?
For instance, Larry Silverstein, Building 7’s owner, admitted that he liaised with the New York Fire Department on 9/11 and they decided to “pull it… and then we watched the building go down.”
“I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, ‘We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.’ And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse,” Silverstein recalled.
“Fact check” organization Snopes later claimed that Silverstein actually meant “pull the firefighters out of the building.”
That’s plausible – super sketchy, but plausible. One would think he would have used the plural pronoun “them” as in “pull them,” but whatever.
Then there’s the spectacle of the BBC reporting that Building 7 – which, again, was not struck by any projectile – had collapsed a full twenty minutes prior to its actual collapse. You can actually see Building 7 in the background of the New York skyline during the report.
How curious, indeed, if not dispositive of malfeasance. It won’t be enough to dissuade the skeptics, who swallowed the government line, from their reflexive trust in the authorities’ version of events. They’re impervious to persuasion.
We should probably expect, then, that they will also willfully ignore the recent bombshell court filing that implicates the CIA in the attacks.
Via The Gray Zone:
“A newly-released court filing raises grave questions about the relationship between Alec Station, a CIA unit set up to track Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden and his associates, and two 9/11 hijackers leading up to the attacks, which was subject to a coverup at the highest levels of the FBI…
The filing is a 21-page declaration by Don Canestraro, a lead investigator for the Office of Military Commissions, the legal body overseeing the cases of 9/11 defendants…
When originally released in 2021 on the Office’s public court docket, every part of the document was redacted except an “unclassified” marking. Given its explosive contents, it is not difficult to see why: as Canestraro’s investigation concluded, at least two 9/11 hijackers had been recruited either knowingly or unknowingly into a joint CIA-Saudi intelligence operation which may have gone awry.”
The article is labyrinthine in its details. It painstakingly documents the process by which these pair of hijackers were identified by US intelligence in Kuala Lumpur while at an al-Qaeda summit, subsequently put on a flight to LA, bypassing customs scrutiny, handed an apartment (the CIA paying for the lease), and then potentially groomed to carry out the 9/11 attack.
Leia o processo judicial na íntegra .
Os fatos da Alec Station e seu possível aliciamento de dois sequestradores do 11 de setembro são obscurecidos pela pesada redação burocrática de documentos relevantes e brigas internas entre FBI e CIA. Talvez nunca saibamos a extensão total do relacionamento da CIA com esses números.
Há, de fato, muitas perguntas sem resposta sobre os laços íntimos entre o Estado Profundo e os sauditas no que se refere às suas atividades anteriores e posteriores aos ataques.
Imediatamente após o 11 de setembro, enquanto a FAA mantinha todo o espaço aéreo dos EUA bloqueado, a inteligência dos EUA levou vários sauditas proeminentes, incluindo membros do clã Bin Laden, para fora do país.
Através do LA Times :
“Tudo começou com um voo fretado de Tampa, na Flórida, para Lexington, Ky., em 13 de setembro. Logo havia pelo menos oito aviões parando em 12 cidades dos Estados Unidos para levar os sauditas de volta. Cerca de duas dúzias de passageiros eram parentes de Bin Laden. Por causa do bloqueio, o voo inicial exigiu autorização dos níveis mais altos do governo – e especificamente da Casa Branca”.
Nenhum membro do governo Bush ou da burocracia permanente do Deep State jamais foi obrigado a responder sob juramento por se esforçar para evacuar essas pessoas. Por que não teriam sido mantidos dentro do país para interrogatório?
Temos evidências circunstanciais esmagadoras – não limitadas às que foram apresentadas aqui – de que elementos do governo dos EUA estiveram envolvidos no maior ataque terrorista da história americana.
Nós também temos motivo.
O Project For a New American Century era um think tank neoconservador composto por futuros líderes do governo Bush, incluindo Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld e Paul Wolfowitz.
Como sua obra-prima, o grupo produziu um documento de 1997 descrevendo suas elevadas ambições geopolíticas chamado “Rebuilding America's Defenses” .
Nela, eles reconheceram que aumentar o já inchado orçamento militar dos Estados Unidos e instigar guerras estrangeiras seria difícil de vender sem justificativa suficiente.
“É provável que esse processo de transformação seja longo, na ausência de algum evento catastrófico e catalisador como um novo Pearl Harbor”, escreveram eles.
Poucos anos depois, com os membros do PNAC instalados nos mais altos escalões do gabinete do governo Bush, eles tiveram seu “evento catastrófico e catalisador”.
Que serendipidade feliz! Que reviravolta fortuita do destino!
A única evidência que não temos é a proverbial arma fumegante, como uma admissão a plenos pulmões de um dos arquitetos do ataque sobre a cumplicidade do governo dos Estados Unidos.
Infelizmente, tais evidências conclusivas podem nunca aparecer, então você pode juntar as peças do quebra-cabeça como quiser.
*
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário