War Is Over (If They Mean It)

WTC7 is not "the key to 9/11 truth", but it is part of the key, which is composite. The following article is over three years old, but what it says is as good today as it was when posted in August, 2006.

"Stop Belittling the Theories About September 11"

by Bill Christison, August 14, 2006

http://dissidentvoice.org/Aug06/Christison14.htm

I'll first quote his bio. at the end of the article:

"Bill Christison is a former senior official of the CIA. He was a National Intelligence Officer and the Director of the CIA's Office of Regional and Political Analysis before his retirement in 1979. Since then he has written numerous articles on U.S. foreign policies."

He was in the CIA for 29 years, I believe.

I'll excerpt a little of the article.

But on July 29 and 30, and then again on August 1, something else happened that increasing numbers of people believe is of equal importance. On these dates C-SPAN rebroadcast a panel discussion, held originally in late June, sponsored by an organization called the American Scholars' Symposium to discuss what really happened on September 11, 2001. Held in Los Angeles, the meeting lasted two days, and the C-SPAN rebroadcast covered one almost two-hour wrap-up session. The meeting was attended by 1,200 people interested in hearing something other than the official story of 9/11. The TV audience was evidently large enough to spur C-SPAN to broadcast the panel discussion five separate times in four days.

...

Let's address the real issues here. Why is it important that we not let the so-called conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 be drowned out? After spending the better part of the last five years treating these theories with utmost skepticism, I have devoted serious time to actually studying them in recent months, and have also carefully watched several videos that are available on the subject. I have come to believe that significant parts of the 9/11 theories are true, and that therefore significant parts of the "official story" put out by the U.S. government and the 9/11 Commission are false. I now think there is persuasive evidence that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the 9/11 Commission would have us believe. The items below highlight the major questions surrounding 9/11 but do not constitute a detailed recounting of the evidence available.

ONE: An airliner almost certainly did not hit The Pentagon. Hard physical evidence supports this conclusion; among other things, the hole in the Pentagon was considerably smaller than an airliner would create. The building was thus presumably hit by something smaller, possibly a missile, or a drone or, less possibly, a smaller manned aircraft. Absolutely no information is available on what happened to the original aircraft (American Airlines Flight 77), the crew, the "hijackers," and the passengers. ... The story put out by the Pentagon is that the plane and its passengers were incinerated; yet video footage of offices in the Pentagon situated at the edge of the hole clearly shows office furniture undamaged. The size of the hole in the Pentagon wall still remains as valid evidence and so far seems irrefutable.

TWO: The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them. A plane did not hit Building 7 of the Center, which also collapsed. All three were most probably destroyed by controlled demolition charges placed in the buildings before 9/11. A substantial volume of evidence shows that typical residues and byproducts from such demolition charges were present in the three buildings after they collapsed. The quality of the research done on this subject is quite impressive.

If the judgments made on Points ONE and TWO above are correct, they raise many "Who done it" questions and strongly suggest that some unnamed persons or groups either inside or with ties to the government were actively creating a "Pearl Harbor" event, most likely to gain public support for the aggressive foreign policies that followed -- policies that would, first, "transform" the entire Middle East, and second, expand U.S. global domination.

These first two points provide the strongest evidence available that the "official story" of 9/11 is not true. If the government could prove this evidence false, and its own story on these points correct, all the other data and speculation supporting the conspiracy theories would be undermined. It has provided no such proof and no answers to growing questions.

Other, less important points supporting the theories include the following.

...

SIX: At least five of the alleged hijackers (or persons with identical names) have since turned up alive in the Middle East. Nonetheless, the FBI has never bothered to re-investigate or revise the list of hijackers. Does this suggest that the FBI knows that no one in the administration is interested in reopening any further investigations?

SEVEN: Numerous pilots have allegedly told the theorists that none of the 19 hijackers could have flown the airliners well enough to hit the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon with as much accuracy as was displayed. ...

EIGHT: No one, except possibly government investigators who are not talking, has seen the plane that went down in Pennsylvania. ...

NINE: Machinations in the U.S. stock market in the days before 9/11 suggest that some inside players in the market knew or suspected that United and American Airlines stock would soon drop. Two of the four of the aircraft involved in 9/11 were, or course, United planes and the other two were American Airlines planes.

It should be reemphasized that these items do not make up a complete list of all the charges made by the theorists, but they are a good sample. Anyone interested in perhaps the best summary of these charges should watch the video "Loose Change".

...

A manageable volume of carefully collected and analyzed evidence is already at hand on both items ONE and TWO above. Such evidence should be used right now to buttress charges that elements within the Bush administration, as well as possibly other groups foreign or domestic, were involved in a massive fraud against the American people, a fraud that has led to many thousands of deaths.

...

Let's give Webster Tarpley and other mistakenly labeled conspiracists who have labored in the wilderness for so long three cheers.

Re. point SEVEN, see the Pilots for 9/11 Truth website, www.pilotsfor911truth.org, and look for videos with retired Lt Col Robert M. Bowman, who flew over 100 military missions and is very experienced in or with flying U.S. military jets. Lt Col Bowman speaks in terms specifically related to point SEVEN, and says that [no] airliner hit the Pentagon and that none could have.

Ray McGovern, who everyone knows, doesn't say that no airliner didn't hit the Pentagon, only saying "whatever hit", clearly meaning that he's not saying that it was an airliner; and he, among many former U.S. government officials, as well as current members of Congress (several of them, both Repub. and Dem.), supports the call for a new and independent 9/11 investigation.

Anyway, many pilots have not allegedly said that the airline did not hit the Pentagon, or couldn't have; they simply have said this. That is, it's not a question of "allegedly", not any longer anyway.

There are websites similar to Pilots for 9/11 Truth, for firefighters, and for former U.S. government officials, military, CIA, and political office holders.

And many of the people who were Commissioners on the 9/11 Commission have clearly denounced the final report, while one or more of these people also denounce Bush Jr, Cheney, and the CIA and/or U.S. military for obstructions, which obviously are criminal obstructions. Furthermore, the military was, early on too, shown to have really lied to the 9/11 Commission.

"Loose Change" is a good documentary for a summary, but while I haven't seen it yet and plan to do so soon, I've been recently seeing that AE911Truth.org's documentary, "9/11: Blueprint for Truth", is said to be very, very good; and this organisation, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, has been entirely or nearly entirely focusing on WTC Towers 1, 2 and 7. Based on what I've seen of AE911Truth's videos, so far, this full documentary must be great, excellent, and thorough.

So, and again, WTC7 is not "the key"; it's an important part, but not alone. Points ONE and TWO in Bill Christison's article, I wholly agree with, and they are the composite I have in mind.

Lastly, I hope the excerpt that I'm posting is not too long, that is, that it does not exceed an acceptable or allowable length for an excerpt.

Mike Corbeil