New 9/11 Timeline update and new video

[paulthompson]

Hi,

Some of you may know me as someone who has been putting together a big 9/11 timeline. I finally have a new update, here:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/updates/update18.html

And an interesting new video here:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/Glass-Graham.html

I'm a bit behind the times from taking some months off, so the update mostly deals with the May 2003 Congressional Inquiry report and the failure to catch hijackers Alhazmi and Almihdhar.

I'm working on getting more information similar to the video that I believe will help prove Senator Bob Graham got a very important warning before 9/11. What he did with that info is an unanswered question. But this is a big reason why we're having such a hard time getting to the truth about 9/11, because the failures are embarrassing to both Democrats and Republicans.

[proud patriot]

1. Woa ... thanks

Bookmarked

[gulfcoastliberal]

7. Love your Research!

It does chill to the bone though. Your information on flight 93 is amazing and everything is so well documented.

[hang a left]

2. Thank you very much paulthompson

[Champion Jack]

3. Amazing stuff, Thanks!

[Mike Niendorff]

4. Paul : looks like you're missing a .css file

At your updated-timeline link ( http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/updates/update18.html ), it starts loading the CR site, then gives a missing file error :

-----

HTTP Status 404 - /timeline/timeline.css

The requested resource (/timeline/timeline.css) is not available.

-----


MDN

[paulthompson]

8. Thanks for the kudos

Don't know about this problem, though. Are you saying you can't load a certain page? Which one? I just tried looking at the update page and it seemed to load fine.

[paulthompson]

11. Fixed

Looks like we got the problem fixed. It appears to have been something showing up for Netscape users. I take it you were using Netscape?

[Mike Niendorff]

13. yep, Netscape 4.79

Glad you were able to fix the glitch, and sorry for not getting back to you sooner on this (I got hired for a new job yesterday -- :party: -- so I've been in and out (mostly out)).

Anyway, the site works great now.

My compliments and thanks for the *amazing* amount of sweat-equity you've put into this effort.


MDN

[ellie]

5. Thanks Paul!

I have been telling everyone about your timeline! It is illuminating and disturbing all at once, but always an invaluable resource.

[grasswire]

6. thanks Paul

You are one of the heroes of the decade. You and Bev Harris and Scott Ritter.....

Thanks again.

[rumguy]

9. good job paul - your site is fantastic

[ComerPerro]

10. Thanks for the updates!

I love the site

[paulthompson]

12. Thanks for the compliments

Did anyone actually watch the video though? Comments?

[Stephanie]

14. Can you tell us about the video, Paul?

I'm on dial-up for the weekend - what is on the video?

~S

[paulthompson]

19. The video transcription

Tip Questions

WPTV, Channel 5 Florida
October 7, 2002
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/wptv100702.html

If you can't watch it, please read it!

[Stephanie]

21. Thanks.

That's very disturbing. If we assume Graham is telling the truth, initially, then we can assume the information did go to the FBI (most likely, right?). And that would be one more warning that was ignored.

[Liberal_Dog]

15. Just Watched The Video

Very interesting. This is definitely worth looking into.

[althecat]

16. Just watched it too Paul...

Fascinating... as you say Graham appears to be hedging his bets a bit. I presume there was no follow up as promised by Kathleen Walyer.

From what I remember Randy Glass was in NYC in the days before the attack trying to warn NYC authorities. I can't remember the detail but something about him being arrested?

al

[althecat]

17. Link to the Randy Glass timeline page

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/randyglass.html

answering my own questions :)

[paulthompson]

20. more info

No, Glass wasn't in NYC the days before or arrested or anything like that. You're probably thinking of another guy named Walid Arkeh, who gave yet another warning about an al-Qaeda attack on the WTC. He was a prisoner in Florida at the time.

Here's the best article about Arkeh:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2002/orlandosentinel010602.html

Glass apparently was told not to go to the press with his warning, but he did drop some vague hints. For instance, in this article a month before 9/11, he warns about an attack that could put "thousands of lives at risk."

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/sunsentinel080701.html

I think there's a lot we still don't know about who knew what when and how in Glass's case. But this is a good story that tells more:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/2001/palmbeachpost101702.html

It's interesting to note that while Glass testified in closed session before the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry, nothing about his case made it into their final report. In fact, Pakistan was not mentioned whatsoever, not even in the still classified sections.

Who was in charge of the inquiry? Bob Graham. So Glass must have presented his information about what Bob Graham knew before 9/11 right there in a meeting headed by Bob Graham! The other committee members complained that Graham (along with Porter Goss) exercised near complete control over the inquiry, and wouldn't let the other committee members speak to witnesses or have a say in the final report. Was he covering up his own role in events before 9/11?

[JackRiddler]

30. Don't be coy about it...

you of all people know that Graham obviously did have some kind of involvement, or at the very least has become complicit after the fact through his behavior, perhaps due to his fear of guilt-by-association.

There is no other explanation for the complete silence, in all of the official 9/11 inquiries including Graham's, with regard to the Goss/Graham meeting with Pakistani ISI Chief Mahmud Ahmad in DC on the morning of 9/11. You have of course covered this ground very well in your timeline and in your excellent article on Ahmad and Omar Saeed, the original "moneyman" of 9/11.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essaysaeed.html

Timeline entries on Omar Saeed Sheikh:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/saeedsheikh.html

How could Graham meet with the ISI head on 9/11 itself and yet manage to entirely ignore Pakistan in the 9/11 report? There is no excuse that does not spell c-o-m-p-l-i-c-i-t-y.

Long as you're on this thread, Paul: What do you think of the recent mammoth article by Chaim Kupferberg?

[paulthompson]

32. Certainly...

Graham is doing something very damning here. The fact that Randy Glass's warning is not mentioned whatsoever in Graham's congressional inquiry after he testified for them is very disturbing. Glass is not some unreliable, untrustworthy guy - NBC Dateline and others have covered his story and presumably thoroughly vetted it.

But what is Graham's role exactly? Did he pass on the warning to others or not? Did he talk to Pakistan about these warnings and was given false assurances, or was he part of the plot?

I'd say his behavior is very suspicious and damning, but I can't say I know all the answers.

Re: Chaim's essay, I like most of it, but some things I don't agree with.

[JackRiddler]

34. I'd be happy to hear what

you don't agree with in Chaim's piece. I wonder about parts, but so much of it is brilliant. It's approaching a novelized version in its detail (I mean that positively, i.e. it tells the story). But he's forced to make so many uncertain calls one way or the other, like any one who sets out to figre out "what really happened," and that adds up.

Let's discuss it here, or should we start a thread on the 9/11 board?

[paulthompson]

35. chaim essay

>But he's forced to make so many uncertain calls one way or the other, like any one who sets out to figre out "what really happened," and that adds up.

That's exactly my problem with it. His points all make sense taken one by one, but every single time he has to choice between conspiracy and coincidence, he chooses conspiracy. So the conspiracy grows bigger and bigger. I've told him that sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

And I've communicated with him about this point alot also: I think he's not being objective when it comes to issues dealing with Israel. My take on things like the Israeli "art student spy ring" are very different from his.

But it's a good essay that everyone should read as food for thought.

[paulthompson]

24. Nope

As far as I can see, no sign of a follow up report by this TV station.

[Nlighten1]

18. I just saw the video...

and WOW...no wonder Senator Graham was dropping hints...

Does anyone know when Glass met with that committee?

[paulthompson]

22. Meeting?

What committee do you mean? He met with the Senate Intelligence Committee to testify for their 9/11 inquiry a few days after this video was shown on TV I think. That's October 2002.

I don't think he met with them before 9/11, but was told his warning had been passed on to them around July 2001.

It's strange you would have the committee basically investigating itself about what it did before 9/11.

[Katie]

23. Thanks for the links

[Stephanie]

25. Everyone should read this

Check out the transcript linked above -

:kick:

[Frank Rose]

26. I've been reading it for 2 days, still...

not done with the first section. An amazing amount of information, I'm want to understand this as well as I can, great defence to use on the flag wavers. I get tired of the freepers trying to end a debate by saying 9-11 changed everything, now we can say, yes it did, let me tell you how. Thank you for your hard work and great information, wonderfull job!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

27. thank you so much for your hard work, time and deication paulthompson

:loveya:

[paulthompson]

28. Thanks for all the thanks

This is very encouraging, and makes me want to do more.

[JackRiddler]

29. Hey Paul, great work as always!!!

...now tell me this: this is update18 although the last one was update 16, is that right?

New Zealand. You don't kid around, do you?

[paulthompson]

39. NZ

>this is update18 although the last one was update 16, is that right?

Yep.

>New Zealand. You don't kid around, do you?

What do you mean?

[nostamj]

31. paul... i went into a panic last week

when my 'office' link to the timeline went DEAD.

I have passed that link to SO many people over the years (years, ain't that a kick?).

i consider your work the rosetta stone for anyone exploring the questions that continue to surround 9/11.

another reason we're having trouble getting the truth:

based on the Suskind/O'Neill book, the bushies NEVER cared about fundamentalist islamic terrorism or bin Laden or al-Qaeda.

it's not so much what we might find, but what we won't find.

bring on the 19,000 pages!

[Selwynn]

33. This is definately a great site.

[Selwynn]

36. Kick (nt)

[Malva Zebrina]

37. Dear Mr. Thompson

this is a great contribution. Thank you so much for offering it and the work you have spent putting it all together.

[snooper2]

38. Cool Thanks!

I sent those links to Randi Rhodes, she will find them interesting.

[Jax]

40. Stellar work here

:thumbsup:

Jax

[JackRiddler]

41. Some timeline comments

Paul,

I'll spare you another round of praise, at this point you know what you've done simply transcends everything else, boils down an entire Internet of 9/11 to one site and then goes and adds all this harder-to-get depth stuff from print, Lexis, and your own ample research. Not to mention your helpers. (I believe I account for something like 4 out of 700,000 entries in this thing myself.)

Oops, I praised after all. Anyway, for the first time I am printing the whole thing and reading it from one end to the other, as a refresher and fact-checking for a new work. So probably I'll have a few comments for you. Here are the first:

-It jumps from Apr. 3, 2003 to July 24, then breaks off a week later. I suppose this is intentional for now?

-You missed the pre-9/11 anthrax angle:

-According to John Judge, the Bush government revived an anthrax program early in 2001 on orders from Cheney and had developed a new milling process just before Sept. 11. He says this was called "Project Jefferson" (!) Please write to him for sourcing and details, I don't think he's published yet.

-Corrobarating this is an NYT piece that stuck in my mind after I read it in the IHT of Sept. 6, 2001, which reported that the Pentagon was experimenting in the "defensive" development of anthrax milling methods. Scientists were assigned to put together homemade laboratories, using only materials available commercially, on the sparse budget of a mere million of your taxpayer dollars. The Pentagon said they weren't actually taking the final step of milling live spores (although why not see how well the lab works, I wonder). The idea was to see what terrorists might be able to do. The French got wind of this program and complained to some UN committee, since the biowarfare convention outlaws all research including "defensive." To allay concerns, the Pentagon invited an NY Times reporter to the Texas base where all this was going on. (I don't remember if it was Judith Miller. I clipped the article but I don't have it at hand.)

This program not only finds out what terrorists might do, it no doubt discovers ways to do it that they might not have thought of themselves. The government scientists gain the astonishing insight that there's fuck-all they can do to stop evil biology students from engaging in such activities if they so wish. And the program's results will be written up in a little "defensive" manual on how to make your own anthrax lab. One day, probably soon, that will end up in the hands of one of our freedom fighters somewhere... and a years down the line he or his successor will use it against the U.S., thus setting off the next round of "defensive" activity on our part. At least it's lucrative!

Or maybe this was the program. I don't remember the article mentioning any names, but of course the first thing to wonder is whether Patrick or Hatfill or some such had anything to do with it...

--Would you like to add a couple of entries about the 2002 Election and its Wellstoning? I think these were essential steps in the overall progression towards fascism. I guess electronic voting machines are outside your purview?

Later!

[paulthompson]

42. comments

>Anyway, for the first time I am printing the whole thing and reading it from one end to the other, as a refresher and fact-checking for a new work.

If you do so, you could do me a big favor if you read it with a close eye on finding mistakes and typos, that would be a big help. You could email those to me.

>-It jumps from Apr. 3, 2003 to July 24, then breaks off a week later. I suppose this is intentional for now?

Yes, I have a lot of catching up to do. There should be another update soon that fills in more of that gap.

>-According to John Judge, the Bush government revived an anthrax program early in 2001 on orders from Cheney and had developed a new milling process just before Sept. 11.

That may be, but I can't put anything in the timeline until it's mentioned in the mainstream media.

>-Would you like to add a couple of entries about the 2002 Election and its Wellstoning? I think these were essential steps in the overall progression towards fascism. I guess electronic voting machines are outside your purview?

Yes, I have a bunch of articles saved up on this, but haven't gotten to processing them yet. I think what's especially relevant to the timeline is that the media consortium's recount was due to come out just after 9/11. In the end, it's release was delayed one month, and the media coverage was totally different because of 9/11, when Bush's ratings were at 90%.

If you want to help make an entry out of this or anything else, that would be much appreciated. There's far too much for me to get to.

[JackRiddler]

44. Paul...

I don't have your e-mail any more. Mine is same as always, please write a mini-note so we can communicate.

The Sept. 5/6 2001 NYT story on anthrax is mainstream, you can find that on Lexis. As for JJ, I'm pretty sure he has that from mainstream sources, too, write to him.

I'm all crushed with stuff at the moment but preparing 9/11 work that I think will contribute indirectly to the timeline.

We're going to pitch the timeline heavily at our 9/11 event in New York Friday, Allen Wood will be speaking there too. I sure hope this results in more volunteers for everything!

----------

Yeah, the NORC findings! Another big one! Though I doubt this was any kind of direct motive for 9/11.

Basically, you look at the entire development of the system over any period you choose - one year, five years, thirty years - and you realize that a 9/11 was a very necessary consequence, a culmination: a swift-sword psychological solution to mobilize the human resources necessary for managing the global crisis and transitioning to open corporate oligarchy.

The attack had predictable consequences in all areas, all going exactly the way the regime and its backers would have desired: i.e.,domestic repression, global aggression, economic transformation, obedience and suppression of issues, opportunity for individual plunder among the elites, and, above all, the psychological control necessary to achieve all objectives. (For now; in the end it will fail.)

That's easy enough to figure out, but the questions remain: who did figure out the Big Picture, and who was ruthless and well-positioned enough to actually execute the necessary crime? The role of those at the top in the Bush regime was to facilitate, but who were the operatives in charge of the actual mechanics? (I can think of a few prime candidates for that within the regime, of course, start with Cheney.) That will tell us their direct motives.

(You'll notice from the above I'm not really of the happy-coincidence/pure LIHOP or "wishing for Pearl Harbor" camp, though I would welcome anything that moves Americans to these views, as they are not incompatible. One step at a time: if we get a "limited hangout" that opens up the fight for a real investigation and full disclosure.)

[Stephanie]

47. What is the event on Friday?

Might try to stop by.

[JackRiddler]

48. Great! Are you in NYC?

Go here: ny911truth.org

"9-11 GETTING TO THE TRUTH"
Evening of films with panel

Community Church
40 East 35th St.
7 p.m. Friday, Feb. 6th, 8 dollars.

Tell all your friends.

[soup]

43. Some notes and the Judith Miller articles

PBS Transcript

ANTHRAX INVESTIGATION

October 25, 2001


Margaret Warner examines the anthrax investigation with Stephen Engelberg, investigations editor at The New York Times, and Vincent Cannistraro, former head of the CIA's counter-terrorism unit.


MARGARET WARNER: And, Steve Engelberg, for instance, if you had to go out and buy this equipment or get the anthrax, does that leave a trail, or is this stuff available in a way that investigators could never find the trail?

STEPHEN ENGELBERG: Well, you'd be surprised. The Pentagon a couple years ago went and did a program in which they gave some people a million dollars and said, "Go out and build yourself an anthrax factory." And they found that you could get the fermenter you needed on the Internet from Germany, from a brewery, you know, somebody selling used equipment. The other equipment was basically available if you knew what you were doing, from Lowe's Hardware Store or Home Depot. The anthrax is a bit of a trick if you want to get a strain that is truly virulent, that takes something. But the main thing you need here is knowledge. Once you know what you're doing and you have somebody guiding you, the trail you leave is not that wide a swath.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/july-dec01/anthrax_10-24.html

-------------------------

On Sept. 4, 2001 -- just a week before the Sept. 11 attacks, the Times reported that from 1997-2000, the CIA conducted a program called Clear Vision, to build a model of a Soviet germ bomblet. The program was carried out at the West Jefferson, Ohio, labs of Battelle Memorial Institute, a defense and CIA contractor. In addition, the Times story reported, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon's intelligence arm, hired Battelle last year to create a type of genetically enhanced version of anthrax, a "superbug," to see if the anthrax vaccine currently in use by the Pentagon was effective against it. A second Pentagon program, called Bacchus, involved building a germ factory in the Nevada desert from scratch, but reportedly did not use real germs, but simulants that mimic their dispersal.

"I was only aware of one of those three programs," Harris says. "I was never told by the Defense Department about the other two. I was also not aware that since the early 1990s, the U.S. Army has apparently been producing small quantities of dry, very potent Ames strain anthrax."
http://www.totse.com/en/politics/terrorists_and_freedom_fighters/163722.html



------------------------
U.S. Germ Warfare Research Pushes Treaty Limits

September 4, 2001
By THE NEW YORK TIMES
by Judith Miller, Stephen Engelberg and William J. Broad.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/04/international/04GERM.html?searchpv=nytToday&pagewanted=all

Over the past several years, the United States has embarked on a program of secret research on biological weapons that, some officials say, tests the limits of the global treaty banning such weapons.

The 1972 treaty forbids nations from developing or acquiring weapons that spread disease, but it allows work on vaccines and other protective measures. Government officials said the secret research, which mimicked the major steps a state or terrorist would take to create a biological arsenal, was aimed at better understanding the threat.

The projects, which have not been previously disclosed, were begun under President Clinton and have been embraced by the Bush administration, which intends to expand them.

Earlier this year, administration officials said, the Pentagon drew up plans to engineer genetically a potentially more potent variant of the bacterium that causes anthrax, a deadly disease ideal for germ warfare.

---


Next to Old Rec Hall, a 'Germ-Making Plant'

New York Times
September 4, 2001
By JUDITH MILLER
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/04/international/04BIOW.html

CAMP 12, NEVADA TEST SITE, Nevada - In a nondescript mustard-colored building that was once a military recreation hall and barbershop, the Pentagon has built a germ factory that could make enough lethal microbes to wipe out entire cities.

Adjacent to the pool tables, the shuffleboard and the bar stands a gleaming stainless steel cylinder, the 50-liter (53- quart) fermenter in which germs can be cultivated.

The apparatus, which includes a latticework of pipes and other equipment, was made entirely with commercially available components bought from hardware stores and other suppliers for about $1 million - a pittance for a weapon that could deliver death on such a large scale.

The factory was built by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, an arm of the Pentagon that works to contain the spread of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. Officials said the project was intended to assess how hard it would be for a terrorist or rogue nation to assemble a germ factory.

--------------------------------------

NucNews archives are a goldmine for research.

both of the above New York Times articles available:
http://nucnews.net/nucnews/briefslv.htm

[JackRiddler]

46. Wow!!!! Thank you! What a site!

Hey, you found the articles directly - and there indeed is "Project Jefferson," so there we go Paul, you have a mainstream source for this.

But what an incredible resource: NucNews. Never saw it before! Fantastic! Thank you!

[JackRiddler]

45. PS anthrax

Are you aware of this site?

Ed Lake - ANTHRAX INVESTIGATION www.anthraxinvestigation.com

He's firmly in the "lone perpetrator" camp and even suggests Barbara Hatch Rosenberg as a suspect at least as credible to him as Hatfill

but

very detailed information and analysis of letters. Also contains an section listing the countless anthrax warnings and speculations immediately after Sept. 11th.

[paulthompson]

49. anthrax stuff

Thanks for all that. More stuff I'll have to include. If anyone wants to help with any of this please do, because I'm just drowning in articles I need to add. The anthrax case alone, I've got a big backlog. And most of what I learn about that comes from Ed Lake's site. I gather he's doing a better job on the anthrax case than the entire FBI combined. There was even a prominent Time magazine story about his website.

[JackRiddler]

50. kick

x