.....
An explosive court filing from the Guantanamo Military Commission – a court considering the cases of defendants accused of carrying out the "9/11" terrorist attacks on New York – has seemingly confirmed the unthinkable.
The document was originally published via a Guantanamo Bay court docket, but while public, it was completely redacted. Independent researchers obtained an unexpurgated copy. It is an account by the Commission’s lead investigator, DEA veteran Don Canestraro, of his personal probe of potential Saudi government involvement in the 9/11 attacks, conducted at the request of the defendants’ lawyers.
Two of the hijackers were being closely monitored by the CIA and may, wittingly or not, have been recruited by Langley long before they flew planes into the World Trade Center buildings.
The story of two men
Of the great many enduring mysteries of the 9/11 attacks still unresolved over two decades later, perhaps the biggest and gravest relate to the activities of Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar in the 18 months leading up to that fateful day. The pair traveled to the US on multi-entry visas in January 2000, despite having repeatedly been flagged by the CIA and NSA previously as likely Al Qaeda terrorists.
Mere days before their arrival, they attended an Al Qaeda summit in Kuala Lumpur, during which key details of the 9/11 attacks are likely to have been discussed and agreed. The meeting was secretly photographed and videotaped by Malaysian authorities at the direct request of the CIA’s Alec Station, a special unit set up to track Osama bin Laden, although oddly, no audio was captured.
Still, this background should’ve been sufficient to prevent Hazmi and Midhar from entering the US – or at least enough for the FBI to be informed of their presence in the country. As it was, they were admitted for a six-month period at Los Angeles International airport without incident, and Bureau representatives within Alec Station were blocked from sharing this information with their superiors by the CIA.
“We’ve got to tell the Bureau about this. These guys clearly are bad. One of them, at least, has a multiple-entry visa to the US. We've got to tell the FBI,” Mark Rossini, a member of Alec Station, has recalled discussing with his colleagues. “[But the CIA] said to me, ‘No, it’s not the FBI’s case, not the FBI’s jurisdiction.’”
Immediately upon arrival, Hazmi and Midhar encountered a Saudi national residing in California named Omar al-Bayoumi in an airport restaurant. Over the next two weeks, he helped them find an apartment in San Diego, co-signed their lease, gave them $1,500 towards their rent, and introduced them to Anwar al-Awlaki, an imam at a local mosque. Al-Awlaki was killed in a US drone strike in Yemen in 2011.
In the wake of 9/11, Bayoumi unsurprisingly became a subject of interest in an FBI probe of potential Saudi involvement in the attacks, known as Operation Encore. In a 2003 interview with investigators in Riyadh, he claimed his meeting with Hazmi and Midhar was a coincidence – he heard them speaking Arabic, realized they couldn’t speak English, and decided to assist them out of charity.
The Bureau reached a very different conclusion – Bayoumi was a Saudi intelligence operative and part of a wider militant Wahhabist network in the US, which handled a myriad of potential and actual terrorists, and monitored the activities of anti-Riyadh dissidents abroad. What’s more, Encore judged there to be a 50/50 chance he had advanced knowledge of the 9/11 attacks before they happened, and so did the Saudi government.
Why was it hidden?
Those bombshell facts remained hidden from public view until March 2022, when a trove of FBI documents was declassified at the request of the White House. The newly released Guantanamo Military Commission filing sheds even further light on Bayoumi’s contact with Hazmi and Midhar – and in turn, the CIA’s keen interest in them, their activities throughout their stay in the US, and refusal to disclose their presence to the FBI until late August 2001.
The filing is an account by the Commission’s lead investigator, DEA veteran Don Canestraro, of his personal probe of potential Saudi government involvement in the 9/11 attacks, conducted at the request of the defendants’ lawyers. Based on a review of classified information held by, and interviews with representatives of, the FBI and Pentagon, the content strongly suggests that the CIA obstructed official investigations to conceal its penetration of Al Qaeda.
That’s the judgment of four separate, unnamed FBI agents interviewed by Canestraro who worked on investigations into the 9/11 attacks. The most incendiary charges were leveled by a Bureau agent referred to in his report as ‘CS-23’, who had “extensive knowledge of counterterrorism and counterintelligence matters.”
CS-23 recounted how the CIA repeatedly lied and stonewalled the FBI in its investigations into Bayoumi. For example, while Agency officials claimed to possess no files on him when asked by Operation Encore representatives, CS-23 knew for a fact this was a “falsehood,” and the CIA maintained several operational files on Bayoumi, amounting to an extensive paper trail.
Furthermore, CS-23 was certain that the CIA used its liaison relationship with the Saudi intelligence services to attempt to recruit Hazmi and Midhar, and circumvent laws prohibiting the Agency from conducting spying operations on US soil, by using Riyadh as a go between.
This account was backed up by another FBI investigator, ‘CS-3,’ who further claims that Bayoumi setting up bank accounts and renting an apartment for the two hijackers in San Diego “was done at the behest of the CIA.” Any information provided to Bayoumi would then be fed back to Alec Station.
CS-3 felt it odd that this CIA unit, situated in the US and staffed by analysts, was involved in recruiting Al Qaeda operatives, as such work is typically the responsibility of case officers trained in covert operations based overseas. ‘CS-IO’ concurred that this arrangement was “highly unusual,” and made it “nearly impossible for [Alec] Station to develop informants inside of Al Qaeda from its base several thousand miles from the countries where Al Qaeda was suspected of operating.”
Despite such tantalizing leads, CS-23 claims senior FBI officials suppressed further investigations into the CIA’s relationship with Bayoumi and the recruitment of Hazmi and Midhar, and Bureau representatives testifying before the joint Senate and Congressional inquiry into 9/11 were instructed not to reveal the full extent of Saudi involvement with Al-Qaeda.
For their part, CS-3 stated that before they and their colleagues were interviewed by the joint inquiry, CIA officials within Alec Station told them not to cooperate fully with investigators and they were looking to “hang someone” for 9/11.
Canestraro does not make any conclusions as to why the CIA concealed vital information from the FBI prior to the attacks, which potentially could have prevented their execution, and why the Bureau subsequently played along with the Agency’s coverup. Although one answer is provided by the unusual nature of Alec Station’s setup.
Namely, that far from infiltrating an Al Qaeda cell to avert terrorism, the Agency was seeking to influence and direct its activities in order to cause terrorism, outside standard recruitment channels. Having stumbled upon such a monstrous connivance, the FBI would’ve known well to leave the entire subject well alone.
By Felix Livshitz
.....
https://www.rt.com/news/574490-cia-dirty-deeds-nine-eleven/
.....
Please post any compelling evidence of no-planes, if you have any. Everything I've looked into so far is outright laughable.
As far as the impossibility of planes taking down the towers, that's certifiably not true. What was never really controversial prior to this assertion, is that steel loses 50% of it weight bearing capacity long before its melting point, and loses 90% of its weight bearing capacity at temperatures created by normal office fires without any jet fuel or the impact of a plane hitting it.
https://www.steelconstruction.info/Fire_damage_assessment_of_hot_rolled_structural_steelwork
Adding to that, if we had the opportunity to speak with certain folks, specifically old time New Yorkers with some knowledge of large building construction and who remember the original construction of the Twin Towers, I think that would dampen this argument considerably.
A first person observation they could relate is that before the sheets went up on these towers, it was obvious that the girder system they used not only allowed for the buildings to go up and completed in such a short period of time (a modular "stacked oreo cookies" type build), but it also meant that the strength of the towers were wholly at their peripheries and NOT at the core center. THAT's why the 1993 bombing in the basement was a complete fail, because it attempted to compromise the core center instead of the periphery.
So yes plane impacts at just one or two floors of the periphery would be more than enough to get the girders structurally weak from the heat, and would give way to the weight of the upper floors. What we originally thought we saw on 9/11 is what we would expect to see in that regard.
Having said all that, I am not discarding other methods involved in bringing down the towers, but the argument that planes alone could not physically bring down the towers is incoherent and based on incorrect information.
And a plane hitting one side magically made the towers fall straight down just like a demolition? Not likely in this universe. If there was a plane, and it hit one side of the towers, it would only weaken one side, making the building fall way differently.
We also have the "lucky" guy call for "pulling" Building 11. And the British news announced the collapse of Building 11 somewhere in the neighborhood of 40 minutes early. You can go on Archive and find every second of video on all the US networks and the British one. You can the woman announce it, while the building is clearly still standing behind her. It was all scripted, provably.
Building 7, not Building 11.
At least they rhyme. That was over 20 years ago, and I'm old.
"Somebody did something."
"At this point, what difference does it make?"
At least the leftists are good for quotes. :)
Wrong. Research more. It's all out there.
There is zero chance that planes alone, along with the resulting fires, could have brought down the Twin Towers.
I do think planes were used, but they are not what brought down the towers.
The idea that steel has a melting point or that it weakens is irrelevant. Yes, if you have a 10-foot section of steel, and you burn it in a fire, it will eventually get weak and eventually it will melt.
But that has nothing whatsoever to do with the Twin Towers.
The reason that skyscrapers are made of steel is primarily due to prevention of catastrophic failure in the event of fire. Steel is the best conductor of heat of all available materials. If one section catches fire, the heat of the steel in that area will be transferred throughout the structure, making any particular square foot of steel not very hot at all.
Certainly, office fires -- even with jet fuel igniting them -- could never have heated the steel up enough to weaken, much less melt.
The heat would have been transferred thoughout the massive 100+ story structure. And the fact that there were 47 core columns of steel in the middle PLUS numerous steel columns all around the towers means that there is absolutely no chance of catastrophic failure due to fire.
This is why no steel structure has ever collapsed due to fire -- before or since.
The buildings were wired for demolition. There were many stories coming out in the months after 9/11 where people were talking about how certain offices were shut down for "electrical upgrades" and employees were not allowed in for several days. This was a few weeks before the event.
The planes flew into precise locations (using homing devices) where explosives were placed, creating the big explosions. Meanwhile, the steel columns were cut via thermite, which is what was seen in the "melted steel." Yes, melted in isolated areas, as the thermite cut right through it and melted in those specific areas.
There was no "pancake collapse," as that is an impossibility, created by the perps to push into the media.
The planes were the distraction, they hit where there were explosives which gave plausibility to the cover story, and the steel columns were cut to bring down the buildings.
Controlled demolition -- the most sophisticated in history -- along with a bullshit cover story to deceive the masses.
It set the stage for the tyrannical Patriot Act and the fake War on Terrorism, to take over Iraq oil.
Bunch of scumbags did this, and they were not operating from any cave in Afghanistan.
Here is an interesting clip from a BBC documentary, "Al Qaeda Does Not Exist." The video has been scrubbed, but this clip pops up from time to time. It explains what Al Qaeda really was:
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/xbzedd
A video called "Hunt the Boeing" was my personal wake-up call that the entire thing was faked:
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2nk2my
P.S. The architect who designed the Twin Towers was on video being interviewed prior to the event about the nature of the design of the towers. I think that video has disappeared. But I remember specifically that he said he designed it the way he did BECAUSE he wanted to make sure they would never fall in case of being hit by MULTIPLE jet airplanes. The Empire State Building had been struck by a plane in foggy conditions years before, and he took that into consideration. He said the "net/girder" system design would be like poking a pencil through a mosquito net, and that even multiple Boeing 707's (large jets at the time -- similar in size the the 757 and 767 that "hit" -- if they did) would have had NO EFFECT on the ability of those buildings to withstand the hits.
THIS
But don’t forget THIS
https://albertjack.co.uk/9-11-conspiracy-the-israeli-art-students/
I don't know what exactly happened. What I can say with certainty is that there were explosives inside of the building that took it to free fall speeds. That's all I am certain about.
This was a preplanned event. Deep state was involved. And the event woke my young ass up about the evil that is truly in this world.