Difference between revisions of "9-11/Official narrative"

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Re-added Corbett's 9/11 ON video - back-up will be locally uploaded on wikispooks YT channel when needed.)
(Forewarning, details)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|constitutes=Official narrative
 
|constitutes=Official narrative
 
|start=2001
 
|start=2001
|description=The [[9-11]] plot, a [[false flag attack]] staged by the [[US/Deep state]] in concert with other [[deep states]], was blamed on "[[19 hijackers]]" who were members of [[Al Qaeda]]. The {{oon}} states that small scale corruption within the US government prevented the successful apprehension of the gang of 19, and also lead to some relatively minor innaccuracies and inconsistencies between the different official narratives.
+
|description=The [[9-11]] plot, a [[false flag attack]] staged by the [[US/Deep state]] in concert with other [[deep states]], was blamed on "[[19 hijackers]]" who were members of [[Al Qaeda]]. The {{oon}} states that small scale corruption within the US government prevented the successful apprehension of the gang of 19, and also lead to some relatively minor inaccuracies and inconsistencies between the different official narratives.
 
}}
 
}}
'''The [[Official narrative]] of 9/11''' (disbelieved by the majority of US citizens in 2018)<ref>https://www.huffpost.com/entry/half-of-americans-believe-911-conspiracy-theories_n_5804ec04e4b0e8c198a92df3 saved at [https://web.archive.org/web/20190104080800/https://www.huffpost.com/entry/half-of-americans-believe-911-conspiracy-theories_n_5804ec04e4b0e8c198a92df3 Archive.org] saved at [https://archive.is/8ySxu Archive.is]</ref> blames the events [[19 Muslim men]], manipulated by [[Ossama bin Laden]]. It is constituted by US government documents such as the [[9-11/Commission/Report]], with the results of subsidiary other "investigations" such as those carried out by [[NIST]] and by [[Gene Corley]]. The narrative has a lot of holes, a few of which are highlighted in [[Elias Davidsson]]'s 2010 ''[[OpEdNews]]'' article ''There is no evidence that Muslims committed the crime of 9/11''.<ref>https://www.opednews.com/articles/There-is-no-evidence-that-by-Elias-Davidsson-100811-366.html</ref>
+
'''The [[Official narrative]] of 9/11''' (disbelieved by the majority of US citizens in [[2018]])<ref>https://www.huffpost.com/entry/half-of-americans-believe-911-conspiracy-theories_n_5804ec04e4b0e8c198a92df3 saved at [https://web.archive.org/web/20190104080800/https://www.huffpost.com/entry/half-of-americans-believe-911-conspiracy-theories_n_5804ec04e4b0e8c198a92df3 Archive.org] saved at [https://archive.is/8ySxu Archive.is]</ref> blames the events [[19 Muslim men]], manipulated by [[Ossama bin Laden]]. It is constituted by US government documents such as the [[9-11/Commission/Report]], with the results of subsidiary other "investigations" such as those carried out by [[NIST]] and by [[Gene Corley]]. The narrative has a lot of holes, a few of which are highlighted in [[Elias Davidsson]]'s 2010 ''[[OpEdNews]]'' article: ''There is no evidence that Muslims committed the crime of 9/11''.<ref>https://www.opednews.com/articles/There-is-no-evidence-that-by-Elias-Davidsson-100811-366.html</ref>
  
 
{{YouTubeVideo
 
{{YouTubeVideo
 
|code=r-GppBpUeYg
 
|code=r-GppBpUeYg
 
|authors=James Corbett
 
|authors=James Corbett
|caption="9/11: A Conspiracy Theory" - a short reminder of just how absurd the {{ON}} actually is. By [[James Corbett]]. This video was deleted from Corbett's own YouTube channel following the termination of his account by YouTube HQ.<ref>https://archive.is/8SO2h</ref>
+
|caption="9/11: A Conspiracy Theory" - a short reminder of just how absurd the {{ON}} actually is (by [[James Corbett]]). This video was deleted from Corbett's own [[YouTube]] channel following the termination of his account by YouTube HQ.<ref>https://archive.is/8SO2h</ref>
 
|width=  
 
|width=  
 
|align=left
 
|align=left
Line 17: Line 17:
 
==Official opposition narrative==
 
==Official opposition narrative==
 
The major [[official opposition narrative]] of 9-11, — that is, the alternative US establishment-friendly narrative which marks the opposite pole of debate acceptable to {{ccm}} — is that a few officials in the US government performed suboptimally, whether as a result of laziness, incompetence, pride, venality etc. Their desire to hide their own shortcomings is a sufficient explanation for contradictions between different US government accounts of the event and for other various way that they fail to explain the events of that day. This was alleged by [[Anthony Shaffer]] in the first version of his memoirs, which the [[US DOD]] failed to suppress in what may have been an attempt to promote the story by exploiting the [[Streisand effect]].
 
The major [[official opposition narrative]] of 9-11, — that is, the alternative US establishment-friendly narrative which marks the opposite pole of debate acceptable to {{ccm}} — is that a few officials in the US government performed suboptimally, whether as a result of laziness, incompetence, pride, venality etc. Their desire to hide their own shortcomings is a sufficient explanation for contradictions between different US government accounts of the event and for other various way that they fail to explain the events of that day. This was alleged by [[Anthony Shaffer]] in the first version of his memoirs, which the [[US DOD]] failed to suppress in what may have been an attempt to promote the story by exploiting the [[Streisand effect]].
 +
 +
===Forewarning===
 +
''[[The Daily Telegraph]]'' reported on the 16th of September [[2001]], that representatives of the [[Mossad]] were sent to [[Washington]] in August to alert the [[CIA]] and [[FBI]] to the existence of a cell of as many of 200 terrorists who were preparing "a big operation":<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20011024015204/http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/16/wcia16.xml saved at [https://archive.li/XCa9I Archive.is]</ref>
 +
{{QB|
 +
"They had no specific information about what was being planned but linked the plot to Osama bin Laden and told the Americans that there were strong grounds for suspecting Iraqi involvement,"
 +
}}
 +
[[Gordon Thomas]] wrote about the circumstances:<ref>https://www.thehistoryreader.com/military-history/mossad-911/ saved at [https://web.archive.org/web/20230424233730/https://www.thehistoryreader.com/military-history/mossad-911/ Archive.org] saved at [https://archive.li/nkRhI Archive.is]</ref>
 +
{{QB|
 +
While Mossad analysts tried to connect the dots, the reports were also passed on through the long-established back channel to the CIA. The Pentagon was asked to evaluate the threat of an air strike. One of its analysts, Marvin Cetron, wrote, “Coming down the Potomac, you could make a left turn at the Washington Monument and take out the White House.” Another analyst, Martin Clefran, was told “look we can’t manage a crisis until it is a crisis”.
 +
 +
Before 9/11, there was a feeling in Washington that Mossad was once more crying wolf, that it had a vested interest in promoting Islamic fundamentalism as a threat because it feared its terrorists and wanted to persuade the United States that it also faced a similar threat. By the time Efraim Halevy, head of Mossad before 9/11, had come into office, dutifully read the files on terrorism threats, and seen the reaction to Mossad’s warnings, he had decided that, in the words of one of his senior officers, “there was no point in pushing against a bolted door.”
 +
 +
However, Haleavy confirmed to me that Mossad “had sent several warnings in the week prior to September that an attack was coming” and cited “credible chatter” Mossad agents had picked up in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen. In his diplomatic way, he implied that the growing turf war between the FBI and CIA in 2001 was one reason why the warnings were ignored Both agencies had concrete evidence that al-Qaeda was an increasing threat: one of its operatives had been stopped at the last moment from flying a hijacked plane into the Eiffel Tower in Paris, and intel had emerged at Langley, indicating bin Laden was planning an air strike against the economic summit it Italy earlier in 2001. But the sense of paralysis and denial, compounded by the growing turf war between the FBI and the CIA, had continued to hold the U.S. intelligence community in its grip
 +
}}
  
 
==WTC "Collapse"==
 
==WTC "Collapse"==
Line 39: Line 53:
 
|source_URL=http://www.consensus911.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/MSNBC_Condoleezza_Rice_9_11_interview.htm
 
|source_URL=http://www.consensus911.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/MSNBC_Condoleezza_Rice_9_11_interview.htm
 
}}
 
}}
 
  
 
=="Why do they hate us?"==
 
=="Why do they hate us?"==

Revision as of 09:51, 13 September 2023

Event.png 9-11/Official narrative(Official narrative) Rdf-entity.pngRdf-icon.png
Date2001 - Present
Interest ofCass Sunstein
DescriptionThe 9-11 plot, a false flag attack staged by the US/Deep state in concert with other deep states, was blamed on "19 hijackers" who were members of Al Qaeda. The official opposition narrative states that small scale corruption within the US government prevented the successful apprehension of the gang of 19, and also lead to some relatively minor inaccuracies and inconsistencies between the different official narratives.

The Official narrative of 9/11 (disbelieved by the majority of US citizens in 2018)[1] blames the events 19 Muslim men, manipulated by Ossama bin Laden. It is constituted by US government documents such as the 9-11/Commission/Report, with the results of subsidiary other "investigations" such as those carried out by NIST and by Gene Corley. The narrative has a lot of holes, a few of which are highlighted in Elias Davidsson's 2010 OpEdNews article: There is no evidence that Muslims committed the crime of 9/11.[2]

"9/11: A Conspiracy Theory" - a short reminder of just how absurd the Official Narrative actually is (by James Corbett). This video was deleted from Corbett's own YouTube channel following the termination of his account by YouTube HQ.[3]

Official opposition narrative

The major official opposition narrative of 9-11, — that is, the alternative US establishment-friendly narrative which marks the opposite pole of debate acceptable to commercially-controlled media — is that a few officials in the US government performed suboptimally, whether as a result of laziness, incompetence, pride, venality etc. Their desire to hide their own shortcomings is a sufficient explanation for contradictions between different US government accounts of the event and for other various way that they fail to explain the events of that day. This was alleged by Anthony Shaffer in the first version of his memoirs, which the US DOD failed to suppress in what may have been an attempt to promote the story by exploiting the Streisand effect.

Forewarning

The Daily Telegraph reported on the 16th of September 2001, that representatives of the Mossad were sent to Washington in August to alert the CIA and FBI to the existence of a cell of as many of 200 terrorists who were preparing "a big operation":[4]

"They had no specific information about what was being planned but linked the plot to Osama bin Laden and told the Americans that there were strong grounds for suspecting Iraqi involvement,"

Gordon Thomas wrote about the circumstances:[5]

While Mossad analysts tried to connect the dots, the reports were also passed on through the long-established back channel to the CIA. The Pentagon was asked to evaluate the threat of an air strike. One of its analysts, Marvin Cetron, wrote, “Coming down the Potomac, you could make a left turn at the Washington Monument and take out the White House.” Another analyst, Martin Clefran, was told “look we can’t manage a crisis until it is a crisis”.

Before 9/11, there was a feeling in Washington that Mossad was once more crying wolf, that it had a vested interest in promoting Islamic fundamentalism as a threat because it feared its terrorists and wanted to persuade the United States that it also faced a similar threat. By the time Efraim Halevy, head of Mossad before 9/11, had come into office, dutifully read the files on terrorism threats, and seen the reaction to Mossad’s warnings, he had decided that, in the words of one of his senior officers, “there was no point in pushing against a bolted door.”

However, Haleavy confirmed to me that Mossad “had sent several warnings in the week prior to September that an attack was coming” and cited “credible chatter” Mossad agents had picked up in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen. In his diplomatic way, he implied that the growing turf war between the FBI and CIA in 2001 was one reason why the warnings were ignored Both agencies had concrete evidence that al-Qaeda was an increasing threat: one of its operatives had been stopped at the last moment from flying a hijacked plane into the Eiffel Tower in Paris, and intel had emerged at Langley, indicating bin Laden was planning an air strike against the economic summit it Italy earlier in 2001. But the sense of paralysis and denial, compounded by the growing turf war between the FBI and the CIA, had continued to hold the U.S. intelligence community in its grip

WTC "Collapse"

The 9/11 official narrative about the destruction of the World Trade center towers makes extensive use of the word "collapse", which as Donald E. Stahl has pointed out, is an extraordinary term for buildings which turned to dust.[6] The corporate media however have normalised it through constant repetition.

Cost

Robert Mueller stated that the 9-11 attacks cost the attackers “Anywhere from about $500,000 to $550,000.” [7] He further claimed that “the hijackers were tremendously well-disciplined, gave off no warning signs as to this particular type of attack, the timing of attack, the methods that would be utilized or the fact that they individually were involved in some sort of attack. So, there were not those warning signs out there, in my mind, that would have enabled us to prevent what happened on September 11th.” [7]

"Why do they hate us?"

The purpose part of the 9/11 official narrative was always rather slim, and tended to be glossed over, since the enemy image of the "Islamic terrorist" suggests that these people do no act rationally, but are religious extremists and therefore as dangerous and unpredictable as the "lone nut" that killed JFK (sic).

On one occasion,[When?] George W. Bush advanced the suggestion that "they hate us because we are free".[citation needed] Widely ridiculed, this claim was recalled by Chris Hedges in 2017 when he said that “It turns out, 45 years later, that those who truly hate us for our freedoms are not the array of dehumanised enemies cooked up by the war machine — the Vietnamese, Cambodians, Afghans, Iraqis, Iranians, even the Taliban, Al-Qaeda or ISIS. They are the financiers, bankers, politicians, public intellectuals and pundits, lawyers, journalists and business people, cultivated in the elite universities and business schools who sold us the Utopian dream of neoliberalism. We are entering the twilight phase of capitalism. Capitalists unable to generate profits by expanding markets have, as Karl Marx predicted, begun to cannibalise the state like ravenous parasites.” [8]

By 2019, Reddit was pointing users of /r/911truth to the 9-11 Official narrative.


 

An example

Page nameDescription
"9-11/The 19 Hijackers"A collection of 19 Muslim men blamed for the 9/11 attacks, 15 of whom were given visas to enter USA (in several cases, irregularly) at the orders of Richard Armitage.

 

Related Quotations

PageQuoteAuthorDate
9-11/Media response“The widely held belief that the Twin Towers collapsed as a result of the airplane impacts and the resulting fires is, unbeknownst to most people, a revisionist theory. Among individuals who witnessed the event firsthand, the more prevalent hypothesis was that the Twin Towers had been brought down by massive explosions.”Graeme MacQueen
Ted Walter
8 July 2020
Julian Assange“I'm constantly annoyed that people are distracted by false conspiracies such as 9/11, when all around we provide evidence of real conspiracies, for war or mass financial fraud.”Julian Assange19 July 2010
Truth“After a political event of the size of JFK’s assassination or 9/11, everybody runs for cover and prepares their exculpatory narrative. ‘The truth’ doesn’t make it onto the political agenda. This is normal bureaucratic behaviour.”Robin Ramsay

 

Related Document

TitleTypePublication dateAuthor(s)Description
Document:Evolution of the 9/11 Controversy From Conspiracy Theories to Conspiracy PhotographsWikispooks PageDonald StahlAn examination of the photos of the World Trade Center, how clearly they contradict the claims of "collapse", and how the US government has played fast and loose with its changing 9-11/Official narrative and with the law to try to hide this fact.
Many thanks to our Patrons who cover ~2/3 of our hosting bill. Please join them if you can.



References