The 9/11 Evidence that May Hang George W. Bush
By Cheryl Seal, 2 June 2002
The author of this Serendipity website has argued that, in contrast to the official story, the four Boeing jets which were involved in the events of September 11th (assuming there were in fact four such jets) were not hijacked by Arab terrorists but rather that the operation was planned and carried out largely by operatives of the Bush administration itself (using remotely controlled planes and/or missiles) in order to further its agenda for political, economic and military control of the entire planet.
This article by Cheryl Seal mostly accepts the official story as a premise, that on September 11th four Boeing jets were hijacked by Arab terrorists and that these four planes crashed into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania, but she argues plausibly that, if so, high officials in the Bush administration must have known in advance what the Arabs were planning, but, knowing what was likely to happen, stood aside, allowed it to happen, and then took advantage of it in order to further their aims. She shows that *if* we accept the official story then George W. Bush, as commander-in-chief responsible for decisions made in the event of America being under attack, is also responsible for allowing the September 11th attacks to occur. Thus either the official story is false or George W. Bush is responsible for the deaths of thousands of Americans.
The 9/11 Evidence that May Hang George W. Bush
© 2002 the News Insider and Cheryl Seal
The Case Against G.W. Bush: a Preliminary "Hearing" in the Court of Common Sense
At the very least Bush allowed 9/11 to happen. But the evidence indicates his guilt involves more than just a huge intentional sin of omission this now seems certain. So it is ulcer-fomenting to watch him, Cheney, Condoleeza Rice and their PR army try to sell America yet another Big Lie that they had no idea such a thing as 9/11 could happen ... they could never have imagined it in their wildest dreams ... they had no specific warnings ... there was nothing unusual about the summer 2001 warnings, etc, etc, ad nauseam. I have compiled some material that clearly shows that the above litany is blatantly, arrogantly false. But first, let's hold a preliminary hearing in the "Court of Common sense".
To see through a wall of propaganda and determine what's really going on, one must tune out the spin completely and take a good, objective look at what has been DONE and what the parties involved have to GAIN by their actions. Let's look at the well-documented facts:
First, when Bush, Rice and the other top Reichmeisters discarded the warning on August 6, Bush's approval ratings had sunk to just 49% this is the red zone for a president. Ask any political expert or presidential historian: Hit 45% and impeachment may soon loom on the horizon.
Second, Bush's actions throughout his entire life show a clear and consistent pattern: without exception, he has always chosen the path that will benefit himself and his corporate friends the most and will do so in the face of even the most outraged criticism.
Third, the stolen election of 2000 proves that Bush was willing to participate in a very daring, very large scale crime in pursuit of power.
Fourth, Bush's father's approval ratings went from shaky to astronomical within a month of declaring war on an "evil terrorist" leader back in 1991. This lesson could hardly have been lost on Bush, Jr.: Start a war and the emotions of the public can be whipped up to a point that will push presidential approval ratings way, way up.
So, given the above facts as "evidence," what do you imagine a self-serving man who has faced no serious opposition from Congress, the press, or the American public would be likely to do? A bookie would most certainly lay odds that Bush would stand aside and allow an event like 9/11 to happen.
Another action that must be considered in the cold hard light of day is Bush's behavior after 9/11. He seized upon national fears, worked at intensifying them, and immediately, without waiting for Congress or serious discussions with other nations, called for an attack on Afghanistan and a global war on terrorism. At the same time, he worked through John Ashcroft with stunning swiftness to dismantle civil liberties. These are not the actions of a leader who wants to keep his nation calm, reassured, and standing tall in its principles in the wake of tragedy. They are the actions of an opportunist who knows, from watching his father's presidency, that the window of opportunity for consolidating his power will be narrow: Bush Sr.'s approval rating high lasted only a few months.
Last, why would Bush admit to having been warned about 9/11 in the first place? In the corporate and political world, this admission is a strategy that has been used over and over by creeps who are guilty of huge crimes and know the heat is on. By confessing to a lesser charge, they try to draw the heat away from the main, more dangerous issue. Ken Lay, the head of Anderson, and every criminal who has ever copped or tried to cop a plea bargain have used this ploy. If Bush were innocent of any complicity in 9/11, why should he make ANY statement? It is always the guilty who feel the need to make statements: "I am not a crook!", "I never had sex with that woman!" Or how about that row of tobacco industry CEO's who all swore that none of them knew their product was harmful or addictive?
Therefore, based on the evidence, I would say we have a phony president who is as guilty as hell, who knows that someone has the goods on him and is breathing down his neck. He is gambling that by making a preemptive strike while he still has control of the media, he can spin a protective wall around himself. Thus we have Dick Cheney appearing on 5/19 on Meet the Press, being "interviewed" about the 9/11 flap by his friend and neighbor Russert. Yep, that's right both interviewer and interviewee live in the feudally exclusive Kalorama suburb of D.C., where houses START at around $1 million. In fact, on the same program, Russert had the arrogance to even mention how he'd seen his buddy out taking the air on his new "It" scooter. How cozy! And this is what is being served to America in the name of a free and honest press. Ya got a problem? Just pick a pal in the press corps and tell him what questions you want him/her to ask you so you can spin them in just the way you want.
Russert asked Cheney how he responded to charges that the information existed in several reports which showed that a WTC-type attack was a possibility. Cheney responded incredibly! that reading all those reports weren't his concern. There's just too darn many of them. Russert let this ridiculous response go totally unchallenged and unqualified.
Here are the questions that are missing the questions a real journalist would have asked: "So then, Mr. Cheney, just what are your criteria for a report that is important enough for you to read? How do you prioritize what you read or what those under you are directed to call to your attention? What reports on this matter DID you read?"
It is insulting to America's intelligence that such questions are not being asked. It's like a grand jury that refuses to ask a murder suspect questions like "Where were you on the night of such and such? What was your relationship to the victim?" but instead says, "Well, here's what we heard from the police that someone thinks you may have killed someone. Go ahead and explain yourself. Don't worry we won't interrupt you or ask you any uncomfortable questions. And, by the way, your good pal who lives down the block volunteered to serve as jury foreman!"
Here's one last FACT to consider. The GOP spent $40 million to pursue an ultimately merit-less case against Clinton that involved diddling an intern and some questionable real estate deals. Since Bush took office, not one dime has been spent by Congress to investigate Cheney and his secret energy dealings, Bush's stolen election, Tom Delay's boiler room scams that have bilked doctors out of millions, the mysterious wild trading of American and United Airlines stock the week before 9/11 or any of the other crimes that were far more serious than Clinton's offenses. Meanwhile, the GOP so eager to spend millions to investigate an office romance has worked overtime to block the initiation of any serious investigation into the biggest crime to have ever been perpetrated on American soil that claimed nearly 3,000 lives. WAKE UP AMERICA!!
"Vague Warning" or Blueprint for Disaster?
The story Bush wants the world to buy is that the warnings he received were vague, routine, too general to act upon. Condi Rice wants us to believe that no one in the administration could have dreamed the hijackers would fly into a landmark building. But, as they say in show biz, this is "lies, lies, and damn lies."
Since 1993, scores of people, collectively, in the White House, Pentagon, State Department, FBI, and CIA have know that an attack like 9/11 was not only a possibility but an increasingly likely probability. Because I am not writing a book here, I will confine myself to summarizing the most obvious pieces of evidence that Bush and his team had to work with. However, they are enough to convict him in any court of opinion.
Terrorism 2000 Report
Don't confuse this 1993 study with the report turned out by the Bush administration in April 2001 under the same title. The 2001 release, a summary of terrorist activity in 2000, lifted the title of the original document, no doubt as a smokescreen to confuse anyone who might be seeking the 1993 document through a search engine or library archives.
In 1993, the Pentagon commissioned, via the Department of Defense's office of Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict, a think tank-style study of the ways terrorists could execute large-scale acts of terrorism on the US. Participants in the $150,000 study consisted of a panel of 41 intelligence/security experts that included former ranking CIA, FBI, State Department and Rand Corporation officials, as well as an ex-KGB general and Israeli intelligence agent.
One of the problems the team brainstormed over was the various ways an airplane could be used to destroy national landmarks in fact, the WTC was most certainly on the panel's list of possible targets. One conclusion reached by the team as a future trend in terrorist activity was that extremists would seek to maximize their impact by escalating their attacks from one-at-a-time truck bomb/suicide bomber events to multiple, simultaneous targeting, thereby touting their power and stretching the victim governments' ability to respond.
The possible terrorist scenarios the team outlined scared the socks off folks in the government. One high-level official described it as "too outrageous." As a result, the team's report, Terrorism 2000 (a reference to terrorism in the new millennium) was blocked from public release. Even a toned down version that had been proposed as a way to raise public awareness and improve national preparedness was killed! A draft of the report was nonetheless passed on through the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the Federal Emergency Management Agency. There is absolutely no doubt that this information was available to everyone in the Bush Administration, including Ms. Rice. It should have been required reading especially since many of the predictions made by the report had already come true before 9/11.
Four instances of planes used as weapons before 2001
1994: A Federal Express Flight engineer was apprehended as he tried to storm the cockpit of a DC-10. The engineer, despondent over his impending firing, had planned to crash the plane into a Fed Ex building in Memphis.
1994: A pilot stole a Cessna and tried to crash it into the White House. He instead hit a tree on the White House grounds, not far from Clinton's bedroom.
1995: An Islamic fundamentalist group hijacked an Air France flight and loaded the plane with 27 tons of fuel in Marseilles as a way to turn it into an incendiary bomb when they crashed it into the Eiffel tower. This plan was thwarted when Special Forces stormed the craft before it could leave Marseilles.
1995: Abdul Hakim Murad confessed to planting timed explosive devices on eleven US airline flights in an attempt to create a "multiple attack" event (as outlined in the "too outrageous" Terrorism 2000 report). The same terrorist group also planned to crash on airplane into CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, and another into the Pentagon (but Condi didn't dream anyone would ever try such a thing in 2001!). This scheme was not a wild and fevered plot. It was in the advanced planning stages to the point where specific flights had already been selected. Murad himself was going to be the suicide pilot who hit the CIA headquarters. Where did he get his pilot training? In a US flight school.
The specifics of the "vague warning"
The most glaring lie Bush is using in his current spin is his claim that the warnings he received were too vague to act upon. However, the facts all by themselves scream "liar!"
From April 2001 right up to the day the WTC and Pentagon were slammed urgent warnings of impending large-scale attacks by terrorists had been issued to the Bush administration from multiple sources. Germany, Egypt, Russia and Israel all delivered alerts that accurately foretold the scale of the attack and that it would involve a prominent landmark of some type. This would automatically put the WTC and Pentagon on the short list, especially as both landmarks had been targeted before (as mentioned above, the Pentagon attack was averted).
The German intelligence agency BND warned the US and Israel both in June that Middle Eastern terrorists were "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture." This is hardly vague, and hardly refers to an "overseas danger" to Americans (which of our prominent landmarks is in Europe or Asia, pray tell?).
On June 13, Egypt sent an urgent warning that a plane stuffed with explosives could be used as a weapon against George Bush. It was assumed, incorrectly at that time, that the target could be the G-8 summit in Genoa, held in June 2001.
Vladimir Putin was so certain of the information he received in the summer of 2001 of an impending attack that he personally instructed Russian intelligence to tell Bush "in the strongest possible terms" (his own words on September 15, 2001) of an impending attack involving airports and government. The Russians told the CIA that 25 terrorist pilots had been specially trained to execute suicide missions. It was around the same time that the FBI was receiving tips about suspicious Arab men in US flight schools.
In August, 2001, the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad warned the CIA and FBI that as many as 200 al Qaeda members were infiltrating the US and planning "a major assault on the US" against "a large-scale target" in a setting where Americans would be "very vulnerable."
The NSA cracked bin Laden's encryption code by February 2001
Even before April the Bush administration HAD TO KNOW something was up and probably had info that was even more specific than the warnings given above. According to UPI correspondent Richard Sale, by February 2001 the National Security Agency had broken Osama bin Laden's communications encryption system. We know that the encryption was broken because the Bush administration reported AFTER 9/11 that it had intercepted encrypted calls bin Laden made to his mother two days before the attack, saying "In two days, you're going to hear big news, and you're not going to hear from me for a while." If this message was intercepted before the attack, what others were intercepted as well that the Bush administration did NOT reveal? Most likely six months' worth of terrorist planning.
The CIA knew of suspicious airline stock trades by September 7
Last but not least, the CIA knew a week before the attack WHICH airlines were most likely to be hijacked. The Agency maintains an advanced program called Promis, which monitors unusual stock market activity, SPECIFICALLY as a way to anticipate potential terrorist attacks. Promis provides 24-hour continuous real-time data on stock market activity and the FBI and Justice Department have both admitted that Promis was up and running all through the summer and fall of 2001. So there is no doubt whatsoever that as early as September 7, the CIA knew that something was going down and knew which airlines were being targeted. Even a third-grader could have put this information together with the long litany of warnings above from foreign sources and come up with the conclusion that an American Airlines or United Airlines craft was going to be hijacked in the near future and most likely used to crash into a landmark, quite possibly the World Trade Center.
More smoking facts
According to the official government web site of the Military District of Washington the Pentagon ITSELF planned in detail how it would respond to just such a scenario from October 24-26 2000. And this was no low-level exercise, since it took place in the Office of the Secretaries of Defense conference room. This story was run in Unknown News and picked up the same day by Democrats.com which fortunately kept a copy because within 24 hours the story along with the entire Military District website was scrubbed by the White House!
The model used in this simulation and the response plan was developed by Don Abbott, who is the founder of FieldSoft, a company that makes emergency-response software programs and systems, including FDonScene. This program, according to the FieldSoft site, "is the first and only fire service, software application specifically designed for incident commanders and their staff in the field. The commercial off-the-shelf software (COTS) product is designed to support in-field operations for any type of emergency response. Basically, FDonScene is an automated COTS tool that actively facilitates control and coordination of people, procedures, events and other resources with the touch of a finger. The application is specifically designed for fast, simple and easy use by the incident commander, as well as members of the command staff."
Bush was without doubt very familiar with FDonScene because it was first endorsed by the Texas Fire Chiefs Association while he was governor (1998). And, as the FieldSoft brochure mentions, "FieldSoft has engineered software necessary to integrate FDonScene with a consequence management system under development by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)." So this is definitely a program well known to and used by the military.
Who Was Responsible for What on the Day of September 11, 2001?
The responsibility for protecting America's skies from terrorist attack falls upon the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD, also simply called the "Space Command."). Established in 1958, NORAD is a US-Canadian command that provides warning of missile and air attack against both member nations, according to the organization's Web site. In the Eastern US, NORAD has at its disposal, several Air Force Bases from which F-16s and F-15s can be scrambled at a moment's notice. Among these bases are Otis AFB in Cape Cod, Mass, Griffis AFB in Rome, NY, Andrews AFB just outside DC, and Langley AFB in Eastern Virginia. NORAD's mission statement on its website states:
"The Northeast Air Defense Air Sector's area of responsibility covers more than one-half million square miles of airspace including that over New York City; Washington, D.C.; Chicago and other major metropolitan areas."
THE CHAIN OF COMMAND DURING A TERRORIST ATTACK:
A: The FAA reports hijackings and other threats to NORAD's First Air Force Commander, who is based in Tyndall, FL. On Sept. 11, this was Gen. Larry K. Arnold.
B: The First Air Force Commander then relays this info to The Commander in Chief (CINC) of NORAD. On 9/11, this was Gen. Ralph "Ed" Eberhardt
C: In a grave situation where force seems warranted, the CINC reports to the Commander in Chief ... George Bush. Also notified are Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and acting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Richard B. Myers
The fact that NORAD was well aware that a major attack was a possibility is made obvious by the command's planning, well before Sept. 11, for a major exercise, slated for June 4, 2002. This is from a NORAD announcement:
"On June 4, 2002, the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) will sponsor a multi-agency, bi-national exercise, Amalgam Virgo 02, involving an airborne terrorism scenario over the United States and Canada. The exercise, which was planned prior to the events of Sept. 11, is designed to allow many US and Canadian agencies to test, improve and validate their coordination and operational procedures."
Regardless of what warnings Bush may have received, NORAD was well aware of the threat to American skies.
The Planes and Players of 9/11
F-16: (Fighting Falcon) From USAF fact sheet: "The F-16 Fighting Falcon is a compact, multi-role fighter aircraft. It is highly maneuverable and has proven itself in air-to-air combat and air-to-surface attack." The craft can go from zero to 500 mph in about 2 minutes. Its top speed is about 1,500 mph, while its typical cruising speed is nearly 600 mph. In other words, if a plane had been scrambled from Andrews, just 10 miles away as the crow (or F-16) flies, it would have been able to engage Flight 77 within 15 minutes from the time the call came in. To decide to scramble a plane out of Langley seems to indicate just one thing: help was intentionally delayed by 10 minutes.
F-15 (Eagle): From Air Force fact sheet: "The F-15 Eagle is an all-weather, extremely maneuverable, tactical fighter designed to permit the Air Force to gain and maintain air superiority in aerial combat." This plane can reach an astounding maximum speed of 1,875 mph.
The time required from the notification to scramble to one of these planes being airborne and at top speed is about 12-15 minutes.
The Bush administration had in place, on Sept. 11 in the top five posts relevant to the terrorist attack, men who totally support the administration's vision for a "Star Wars" style military, for the militarization of space and the merging of the military with domestic law enforcement agencies into one big "Homeland Security" entity. The five top players were: Larry K. Arnold, First Air Force Commander of NORAD, Ralph "Ed" Eberhardt, Commander-in-Chief of NORAD, Richard B. Myers, Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, and George W. Bush.
George W. Bush: Guess we don't need to add much here, except to say that Bush did not make it plain to the public at any time since 9/11 that HE was the person that, according to the established chain of command, called the final shots on 9/11.
Donald Rumsfeld: Of course, we know all about Mr. Rumsfeld's lust for power. He is a good pal of Ralph Eberhardt and, in fact, in May of 2001, said Eberhardt was his first choice for chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Rumsfeld is one of the architects of the military-police complex.
Larry K. Arnold: Has, since 9/11, helped in the push toward the militarization of America. On February 20, 2002, he gave a talk on "Homeland Defense" at the SpaceComm 2002 conference in Colorado that had as its topic: "Shaping Information Operations and Space Leadership", i.e., the extension of the military not just into the "Homeland," but into space.
Ralph "Ed" Eberhardt: Eberhardt is a fanatical supporter of the missile defense scheme and the militarization of space. In fact, in May, 2001, Eberhardt said in a speech that he believed control of space was America's "destiny"! Eberhardt is also an enthusiastic supporter of the merging of law enforcement and the military and making technology such as military spy satellites available to police.
Richard B. Myers: Less than three weeks after Bush received the now-famous memo of August 6, Myers was named by Bush to the top post in the US military: Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff. This is what a non-American (and thus less spun) news source (Pravda) had to say about that appointment: "Gen. Myers was chosen for the job precisely because his views are shared by both of his bosses, President George W. Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. He is considered an active advocate of deploying the National Missile Defense program." He told a news conference that he would be working on the materialization of the idea "relentlessly" and "with his sleeves rolled up." Right after 9/11, Myers was caught in a lie when he claimed that no orders were given re: launching aircraft until AFTER the Pentagon was hit, "We did scramble fighter aircraft, AWACs, radar aircraft and tanker aircraft to begin to establish orbits in case other aircraft showed up in the FAA system that were hijacked. That order, to the best of my knowledge, was after the Pentagon was struck." However, Marine Corps Maj. Mike Snyder of NORAD told a Boston Globe reporter that the command had been told about the hijacking 10 minutes before the first plane hit the first World Trade Center tower. Snyder said the fighters remained on the ground until after the Pentagon was hit, even though "fighters routinely intercept aircraft."
Click on this link for a detailed timeline of events
from the departure of AA Flight 11 at 7:59 am on September 11
to Bush's address to the nation at 8:30 pm.
Putting It All Together
Putting it all together with the hotlines that exist between these offices, the time that it would take from the moment the FAA put in its call to Arnold for Bush to respond (allowing two minutes tops per communication) would have been roughly 6 minutes, plus or minus as minute or two. The FAA called NORAD at 8:38 am about the first hijacking. It was 6 minutes later within the timing estimates made above that two F-15s were ordered by Bush to be scrambled from Otis AFB. The evidence clearly shows that Bush had decided AHEAD OF TIME how to handle Flight 77. The FAA call to NORAD that Flight 77 had been hijacked was made at 9:24 it was at 9:24 that the order to scramble planes from LANGLEY was given.
This means this move had already been authorized by BUSH. How could he have pre-authorized such a response unless he had 1) been told about the plane some minutes before when it was obvious to NORAD's radar system that the plane was headed for DC (NORAD did not require an active transponder on Flight 77 to track the plane), or 2) Bush knew before 9/11 that a plane would be hitting the Pentagon at around 9:45 am. Bush also had the authority, at all times after 8:44 (when he obviously gave his first orders re: Otis) to call for an evacuation of the WTC and, at the LATEST, by 9:24 to order federal buildings and landmarks in D.C. to be evacuated. Had he made these orders, hundreds of lives would have been saved. Even if the order to evacuate the second tower of the WTC had been made by 8:50, that precious 12 minutes would have made all the difference to hundreds of WTC workers. The Pentagon workers would have had nearly 15 minutes to evacuate if a call had come in by even 9:30.
Because he had seen the warnings throughout the summer, and the last, strongest one on August 6, he should have been completely prepared for every scenario he had been briefed on and read to take decisive, urgent action to save lives. But he didn't. Instead, as Pentagon workers sat at their desks or moved down the halls, oblivious to the impending danger, at 9:29, Bush had just finished reading the Hungry, Hungry Caterpillar and was getting ready to announce that an "apparent" terrorist attack was underway. Apparent?
But let's take a look for a moment at the bigger picture: From the first, the plan of the Bush administration has been to extend military power into space while creating a domestic police state in the name of "Homeland Security. In this scheme, the line between military and police would be blurred. Elements of the CIA, which has traditionally worked more with the military, have now been folded into the FBI, while yet more restrictions on the power of the agencies over ordinary citizens have been removed. For a grim picture of where Bush et al. were trying to take America as of August, 2001, see The Next Battlefield by Jack Hitt. Here's an excerpt from that article:The political attention devoted to national missile defense, which is an updated version of President Reagan's Strategic Defensive Initiative, has obscured its larger purpose. According to the Strategic Master Plan, N.M.D. is but one part of a triad of technologies along with improved space surveillance and anti-satellite offensive weaponry that the Air Force hopes, will lead to total "space control." George Friedman, an intelligence consultant and the author of "The Future of War," calls the national missile defense plan a "Trojan horse" for the real issue: the coming weaponization of space. The cost of expanding our space assets is only now beginning to show itself. Many of the specific systems for space have had their budgets increased in President (G.W.) Bush's first defense-spending.
The three major proponents of this "new military": Richard B. Myers, Ralph Eberhardt and Donald Rumsfeld.
However, in the summer of 2001, the American public's support for the Bush administration's schemes, in general, was weak and waning fast. In August, 2001 Bush's approval rating had slumped to under 50%. However, within just a few weeks of 9/11, with virtually no opposition from Congress, Myers had been confirmed as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. By Nov. 2001, Homeland Security had been established, and the Patriot Act been passed. By April 2002 Rumsfeld, Myers and Eberhardt had announced the formation of NORTHCOM, the mega military complex that consolidated their power. Here's an excerpt from an April 18, 2002 article in the Boston Globe:Air Force General Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who was responsible for drafting the new command plan and who calls the establishment of the new command the most significant structural change in his 37 years in uniform said yesterday that the Northern Command (NORTHCOM) 'takes the various homeland security missions being performed by various combatant commanders and some agencies and puts them under one commander [to] bring unity and focus to the mission.' Air Force General Ralph E. Eberhardt is slated to head the new command, which will also include oversight of NORAD and the territorial defense missions of the JFCOM.
In short, 9/11 was used as a springboard for the pre-9/11 Bush scheme. The steps taken in the name of Homeland Security that were done in the name of 9/11 were actually already planned well before that event. It was the event that made it possible to implement them. If you want to get an idea of where this merger between the military and law enforcement is headed, how about this statement made by Ralph Eberhardt at the Space Symposium held in Colorado Springs in early 2002: "Over time we can leverage our space assets to support homeland security and law enforcement." So, for example, does this mean the use of military satellites to spy on citizens?
Now ponder this point: Since Bush took office, he has richly rewarded every single person who helped him substantially, usually with top posts or the legislation they wanted. After 9/11, we see Myers and Eberhardt moving up into top posts of incredible power. What were they being rewarded for?
Now, back to 9/11. The simple fact is, if Bush had not ignored the August 6 (and earlier) warnings of terrorist strikes, and had instead acted decisively and responsibly, the scenario that unfolded on 9/11 would have been very different. First of all, on high alert, the airports may have screened passengers more carefully some or all of the hijackers may have failed to get aboard their target aircraft. Secondly, if they had succeeded in boarding the craft, the FAA would have been in a state of readiness for a serious event. At 8:25 am Boston FAA would have immediately called NORAD, who would have been in readiness, perhaps even with preauthorized orders from Bush. The WTC would have been on high alert from Aug. 6 on and an evacuation could have been undertaken as early as 8:30 time enough to save countless lives.
But instead, Bush did not warn the public. When called by NORAD, he failed to respond in a way designed to save lives. In short, the trail of smoke from the smoking gun leads ultimately, and unavoidably, back to George W. Bush.
Source: The News Insider [disappeared]
The complete article is at
The World Trade Center Demolition
and the So-Called War on Terrorism
Bush Flubs it Again Serendipity Home Page