9/11 SMOKING GUNS - Found in the Mainstream Media

[killtown]

I was hoping those of you here on DU can help me increase the number of entries for my 9/11 Smoking Guns page. It started with a 150+ and I would like to see it grow to as many more entries as we can find.

The way I styled this page was with the intention of a quick sentence summary of each smoking gun and formatting it in a printer friendly fashion. I also listed the entries in groups to help show people how they tie into being evidence of a 9/11 conspiracy and/or relate to other smoking gun entries (some entries obviously could be listed in multiple groups).

Each entry is linked back to my oddities page for further analysis and at the end of each entry I include the name of the mainstream source(s) where the information came from.

Also, please post general comments and criticisms of current entries, entry groups, formatting, grammar or anything else you wish. Some people might think that some of the current entries do not constitute being a 9/11 "smoking gun" or that some entries should be combined with other entries, so obviously it's best to focus on "quality" versus "quantity" so as to not get accused of trying to "inflate" the numbers.



Entry submissions:

Be sure that any entries submitted comes from what the average person would consider a "mainstream media" source and not an "alternative media" source and please include the original url link even if it's expired. If the original url is expired, please post a link to where it's cached or reprinted. Also try WayBack Machine to pull up the original page.


Some helpful places to scour for smoking guns: Cooperative Research, Prison Planet, and my oddities page (in case I missed any!)



Comments/Criticisms:

Be sure to not just post a number of a current smoking gun entry because the numbers corresponding to an entry will change when additional entries are added or subtracted. Please post the entire entry you wish to comment about.


Link to my current 9/11 Smoking Gun page: Main, Mirror 1, Mirror 2

[killtown]

1. U.S. Gov't monitoring Americans after 9/11

What does everybody think about things like this as being a possible motive for BushCo to want to concoct 9/11:

Reports: Bush Authorized NSA to Spy in U.S.

NEW YORK, Dec. 16, 2005

(AP) The National Security Agency has eavesdropped, without warrants, on as many 500 people inside the United States at any given time since 2002, The New York Times reported Friday.

That year, following the Sept. 11 attacks, President Bush authorized the NSA to monitor the international phone calls and international e-mails of hundreds _ perhaps thousands _ of people inside the United States, the Times reported.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/12/16/ap/national/mainD8EHBBM80.shtml

Would this be considered a 9/11 smoking gun?

[seatnineb]

4. Bush is invoking the pentagon hijackers as the reason for eavesdroppin'

Bush defended signing the order by saying that two of the September 11 hijackers who flew the plane into the Pentagon -- Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi -- "communicated while they were in the United States to other members of al Qaeda who were overseas, but we didn't know they were here until it was too late."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/17/bush.nsa/

Bush co should really thank Mohammad Atta and his flyin' circus!

If it was not for 9/11....he would never have been able to do all these nefariouse deeds.

[killtown]

8. I guess what I want to know about this spying

is that one motive our gov't would do 9/11 was to create reasons to spy on it's own people in which this latest fact that Bush authorized eavesdropping would go to support. However the counter-argument is strong in that what gov't would not increase surveillance after a terrorist attack?

[MellowOne]

54. Bingo!

He needed 9/11 to start the ball rolling so he could control the Middle East.

[Make7]

2. Perhaps this will help refine your list:

Idiom: Smoking gun

Idiom Definition:

Meaning:

• A smoking gun is definitive proof of someone's guilt.

http://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/smoking-gun.html

-Make7

[killtown]

3. with that in mind

do you think any of my entries in their designated sections or in general doesn't constitute a smoking gun?

[Make7]

5. Yes. ( n/t )

[killtown]

7. any particular one you'd like to bring up?

please copy the whole entry if you do.

[Make7]

9. I guess I'll just start at the beginning.

PLANNED BEFORE, FUTURE IDEAS...

1. 1962 - US military drafted plans (Operation Northwoods) to commit terror in US cities and kill innocent Americans to trick public into supporting war against Cuba. (ABC)
   
   
2. March '01, X-Files spin off show depicts US plot to hijack a Boeing 727 and crash it into WTC to blame foreign terrorists to provoke war. (FOX)

http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html

How exactly are either of those "definitive proof of someone's guilt"?

-Make7

[killtown]

10. I take it you're the semantics type?

1) People say our gov't would never be so evil to plan 9/11. Northwoods proves that wrong and is also similar to what happened on 9/11.

2) Got to get the idea for this evil plan somewhere! Plus, it also contradicts BushCo's "we never thought anybody would hijack planes and use them as missiles" and also the sheer coincidence of the show being aired shortly before it happened in real life.

Both are at least strong supporting evidence if you don't think it "technically" fits your definition. That's why I put all my entries into categories.

[LARED]

11. Oddly enough there are people that actually believe

we should use the correct words to provide a proper context about a message one trys to create. IE words mean something.

If you say you have a "smoking gun" people might take you at your word and believe you have definitive proof of someone's guilt, when in reality you have what you just admitted is at best supporting evidence. Even that is a huge stretch for the word evidence.

[killtown]

12. maybe I didn't explain myself very well the 1st time

Some of my entries if taken alone might not meet the definition of a "smoking gun" relating to 9/11. However, they are supporting evidence to their related category that are smoking guns to 9/11. If there is a conspiracy such as 9/11, it would have to include among the following: perpetrators/culprits, motive(s), a plan (#'s 1 & 2), preparation, cover-ups, and patsies (if the plan is to blame it on someone else), etc.

No some entries could be placed in multiple categories and I set some categories up (Pentagon, WTC, Iraq, etc) to help people see how all of those entries under them fit into the alleged conspiracy at hand.

[LARED]

13. I think I see your point

When your web pages says

150+ 9/11 Smoking Guns

You don't mean you have 150+ individual smoking guns but the sum total of the 150+ is the smoking gun.

I think you should change the title of your web page if that's what you mean.

BTW, do any of the 150+ qualify as a singular "smoking gun"

[killtown]

14. So I should change the title to

"150+ direct and indirect 9/11 smoking guns"?


>>>BTW, do any of the 150+ qualify as a singular "smoking gun"<<<

Are you saying none of them do?

[LARED]

15. You want me to read all 150+ to see if I think they

qualify. No thanks, just point me to the ones you think are smoking guns.

[killtown]

16. It's not that hard

should take you less than 10 minutes to skim through it: http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html


And I'll share one with you since you asked:


26. CIA planned exercise to simulate plane crash into government building morning of 9/11. (Boston Globe, USA Today)


It could only be two things:

1) the biggest of huge coincidences

2) them being in on it


Agreed that this entry constitutes a "smoking gun"?

ps - I don't believe in huge coincidence like that. Do you?

[LARED]

17. That is not a smoking gun, it's hardly a squirt pistol

First off the NRO is run by the DOD, not the CIA. They employ people from the CIA and other places, but they are the responsibility of the DOD.

In the second place, running a drill on 9/11 that simulates a plane crash into the building due to mechanical failure is a bit of a coincidence, but is hardly a huge coincidence. It no more interesting that the thousands of things we call coincidences all the time. The office is located 4 miles away from a busy airport and is apparently a strategic place that most likely has annual drills using different scenarios.

I work in a place deemed a hazardous facility by the government (we are not a government facility) and we are mandated to hold two drills per year. A few years prior to 9/11 we simulated a plane crash in the facility because we are located under a major flight path at a nearby airport.

I see no connection to the events in 9/11 with the drill being scheduled and you do not even attempt to connect any dots on your web page. In fact you state the drill was canceled because of the events of 9/11.

How is this a smoking gun?

[killtown]

19. Squirt pistol???

(no wonder our gov't gets away with 9/11)

First off the NRO is run by the DOD, not the CIA. They employ people from the CIA and other places, but they are the responsibility of the DOD.

Ok, I changed it to:

26. US intel agency planned exercise to simulate plane crash into government building morning of 9/11. (Boston Globe, USA Today)

In the second place, running a drill on 9/11 that simulates a plane crash into the building due to mechanical failure is a bit of a coincidence, but is hardly a huge coincidence. It no more interesting that the thousands of things we call coincidences all the time. The office is located 4 miles away from a busy airport and is apparently a strategic place that most likely has annual drills using different scenarios.

1) Who said the drill was to simulate a plane mechanical failure again??? Oh yeah that's right, the intel agency that was conducting the drill. They wouldn't "lie".

2) Hardly a coincidence??? Here's how our gov't even described it: "In what the government describes as a bizarre coincidence." Would you say "bizarre" compares more to "huge" or "squirt pistol"?

3) AP: "The agency is about four miles from the runways of Washington Dulles International Airport... Adding to the coincidence, American Airlines Flight 77 took off from Dulles..."

we are mandated to hold two drills per year. A few years prior to 9/11 we simulated a plane crash in the facility

If this NRO simulation was a few years prior, and not the VERY SAME MORNING, then I wouldn't have included it.

I see no connection to the events in 9/11 with the drill being scheduled and you do not even attempt to connect any dots on your web page. In fact you state the drill was canceled because of the events of 9/11.

How is this a smoking gun?

<roll eyes>

The drill was the VERY SAME MORNING as the real event involving a plane crashing into a gov't building. Don't you think if 9/11 was an inside job that they would be having one of their agencies conducting the operations of flying a plane/missile/whatever into the Pentagon or having them run a simulation to trick the non-involved gov't/military agencies?

And who said the drill was canceled? Oh yeah, that same gov't intel agency.

[LARED]

21. So, based on your logic

the government intel agency that provided the information there was a drill on 9/11 lied about some aspects of the drill. So if they lied about parts of the drill you don't like, how do you know they didn't make up the whole story or did not lie about part you like.

You can't have it both ways. If you cherry pick the parts you like and discount the parts you don't like you have no credibility as a researcher.

My point about my place of business having a drill that included an airplane crash was to point out the there are literally thousands of organizations that drill for emergency response every year and there are certainly going to be drill on many days of a year. Particularly true in the fall and spring when weather is good. The fact there was a drill on 9/11 at the NRO is statistically insignificant.

As for your ability to connect the dots, you seem to forget one important element, flight 77 did hit the Pentagon. There is no need for remote control/missiles/whatever to connect a dot.

It would be nice if you guys trying to connect the dots actually had a starting dot that was actually based on fact rather than wild speculation.

[killtown]

22. When damaging info comes out, that's when the cover-up begins

here's a logical scenario if 9/11 was an inside job:

1) word gets out that that NRO had some kind of plane crash into a gov't building simulation the morning the real event happens

2) NRO: "it was only a simulation," "we canceled it right away," "it was just a bizarre 'coincidence'," "nothing to see here, run along."

Is this your scenario if 9/11 was an inside job?:

1) word gets out that that NRO had some kind of plane crash into a gov't building simulation the morning the real event happens (9/11)

2) NRO: "Yep, it was us. You caught us. We were actually flying those planes via remote control."

The fact there was a drill on 9/11 at the NRO is statistically insignificant.

Are you a coincidence theorist?

As for your ability to connect the dots, you seem to forget one important element, flight 77 did hit the Pentagon. There is no need for remote control/missiles/whatever to connect a dot.

Some 9/11 skeptics think a 757 hit the Pentagon, but was flown via remote control. Some also think this NRO simulation was to confuse non-complicit military/FAA/ground controllers that morning.

[LARED]

25. So,

how do you decide when information is damaging?

[killtown]

26. That can be answered by answering this...

1) How many coincidences relating to the same event does one need before they are not coincidences anymore?

We all know coincidences happen, but the more you have related to the same event, the statistical probability that they are all just "coincidences" becomes less and less. Agreed?



Another question I have for you, if the Bush admin were being brought to trial for 9/11 conspiracy charges and you were assigned as the prosecutor, would you include any bit of evidence on my 9/11 Smoking Guns page for your case?

[LARED]

27. You seem to be avoiding the question

A coincidence criteria is not very useful in determining if information is damaging.

I don't believe that a drill at the NRO means anything of significance because I know facilities practice emergency response drills on a regular basis. You think this information is somehow damaging?

Why?

[killtown]

28. Definition of a "coincidence"

coincidence - A sequence of events that although accidental seems to have been planned or arranged.

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/coincidence

And by the way, Scott Peterson was convicted and sentenced to death pretty much on coincidences.

I don't believe that a drill at the NRO means anything of significance because I know facilities practice emergency response drills on a regular basis. You think this information is somehow damaging?

Why?

Didn't you read where even the government said it was a "bizarre coincidence"? That's kind of like the bizarre coincidence that Scott Peterson was boating in the same area where his wife and unborn kid later washed up. To you I guess Scott boating there the same morning Lacy went missing was just a "squirt pistol" smoking gun.

So, as I ALREADY mentioned, if the NRO simulation was on any other day then the SAME MORNING as the real event happened, I wouldn't think much of it other than being a normal precautionary simulation drill.

If you don't think any of my 9/11 Smoking Gun entries even qualify as a coincidence, then I can't help you anymore.

[LARED]

29. Lets try again

You stated

When damaging info comes out, that's when the cover-up begins

You seem to be saying a coincidence is damaging so it was trying to be covered up.

Yet the definition you provided

coincidence - A sequence of events that although accidental seems to have been planned or arranged.

Implicitly states a coincidence is something that only seems to be planned but is accidental. Something I interpret as not damaging.

So we again wind up back to my original question of how do you know it information is damaging?

An example of possibly damaging information would be the July WH briefing that indicated terrorist activity in the coming weeks. According to your method the WH should have tried to cover this up. Did they?

[killtown]

30. Dude, this in not rocket science

and I'm beginning to think you are trolling and I'm wasting my time.

For the last time, word gets out the NRO simulated a plane crash into a gov't building the same morning of 9/11. Reporters catch wind of this and go interview those at the NRO (obviously the reporters think this is very odd or they wouldn't think it was newsworthy). The NRO claims "it was just a simulation," "we were surprised to," "we canceled it as some as we found out," to cover their tracks instead of saying "yep, it was us. You caught us."

If none of this seems to be sinking through to you, I suggest you start watching Law & Order, CSI, etc for some insight about coincidences and crime solving.

[LARED]

31. Your right, this is not rocket science

I am just trying to figure out how you decide if information is damaging to the point it requires a cover-up making the killtown "smoking gun" list.

Lets try it this way.

How is one coincidence damaging and requires a cover-up and another is just a normal coincidence and not damaging.

Really I'm not trolling, I am trying to understand the thought process used to determine "9/11 smoking guns".

For instance you think • January 5, 2002 - Bush refers to the day of the 9/11 attacks as "an interesting day." is a smoking gun. How did you figure that out?

[killtown]

32. Bush speak

For instance you think • January 5, 2002 - Bush refers to the day of the 9/11 attacks as "an interesting day." is a smoking gun. How did you figure that out?

Let's put it like this, if my wife was murdered one day and later on I described the day my wife was murdered as an "interesting day," wouldn't that raise an eyebrow or two in you? Wouldn't you become suspicious of me for saying such a callous thing? Wouldn't one reason that I would say such an insensitive thing like that was because I was involved in her murder somehow and that would explain my insensitive statement?

[LARED]

33. All I can say is your thought process

is quite foreign to me. I don't even think it was an insensitive remark, let alone an indicator he was involved in the attacks.

I think you are trying too hard.

[killtown]

34. Some people were not meant to be a detective

so be thankful you still have your day job!

[LARED]

35. My day job happens to include

quite a bit of failure analysis. Fun work at times.

And I can assure you I am pretty good at it.

[killtown]

37. Well sorry to say

if a loved one of mine was a victim of a crime, you'd be one of the last people I'd hire to investigate it. I wouldn't hire coincidence theorists to solve a crime.

[LARED]

41. You have most of it back wards

First, I do not investigate crimes, I on occasion do failure analysis in a manufacturing environment. Years ago I did them on a routine basis. My experience is what helps me discern material events from events that are not material. A skill you should consider sharpening.

I am not the one with a web site that lists 150+ events, that you believe constitutes smoking guns for an inside job. The basis for this is that they can't all be coincidences, when in reality the importance or materiality of most are either contrived or not even related to the events of 9/11.

[Make7]

36. Is suspicion definitive proof?

Maybe you should change the name of your list to:

   150+ Eyebrow Raising Facts of 9/11.

-Make7

[killtown]

38. Hey, I kind of like that!

btw, did any of my 150+ entries raise any of your eyebrows?

[Make7]

43. I didn't get very far down the list.

After seeing that the first few were not actually "smoking guns", I didn't bother continuing.

-Make7

[killtown]

49. How do you know there aren't any actually smoking guns

that fit your definition on my list if you didn't bother reading the ENTIRE thing? You didn't avoid reading the entire list because you were afraid of what you might find, did you?

[Make7]

39. Didn't you figure that out just from my first post in this thread?

1. The U.S. Government has actually done, and continues to do things more "evil" than 9/11. That doesn't prove that they perpetrated 9/11 in any way. (If someone is murdered in a city where a serial killer is preying on people, does that mean that the serial killer is automatically guilty?)
   
2. Do you honestly believe the U.S. Government, and those that control it, are making their planning decisions about geo-politics based on a TV show?
   
   The Bush administration has numerous liars filling its ranks, but that does not prove anything regarding them planning 9/11.

I do not think either of the first two items on your list are strong supporting evidence, but even if they were, they are not "smoking guns".

These first two examples comprise an entire category and that does nothing to help them come any closer to achieving "smoking gun" status, why do you feel the other categories are any different?

-Make7

[killtown]

40. huh?

1) Bad analogy.

2) Even worse question.


If 9/11 was an inside job, the perps would have to have a plan and have gotten their idea from somewhere. I think #1 and 2 fit that nicely.


I think I will change the name of my page to 150+ Eyebrow Raising facts of 9/11, because my goal is to convince the official conspiracy believers like you it was an inside job and no sense getting all tied by debating the precise meaning of a phrase.

[Make7]

42. Well, you could probably convince me that 9/11 was an inside job...

...if you actually had a smoking gun.

I think the incorrect usage of the phrase "smoking gun" actually undermines your goal because people will think you are misrepresenting your case and not take you seriously.

-Make7

[killtown]

50. Ok here...

"Pentagon construction worker says on Larry King Live that plane that hit Pentagon had 'fewer engines' than the other 9/11 planes. (CNN)"


PS - I did change my title from smoking guns to 'smoking guns' just so I don't have to call a waambulance for people like...

[seatnineb]

6. Senetor says there was no law allowing the president's act.

After hearing Bush's response, Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wisconsin, said there was no law allowing the president's actions and that "it's a sad day."

"He's trying to claim somehow that the authorization for the Afghanistan attack after 9/11 permitted this, and that's just absurd," Feingold said. "There's not a single senator or member of Congress who thought we were authorizing wiretaps."

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/17/bush.nsa/

[chat_noir]

18. Asia Times Online - April, 2004

9-11 AND THE SMOKING GUN
Part 2: A real smoking gun


If the 9-11 Commission is really looking for a smoking gun, it should look no further than at Lieutenant-General Mahmoud Ahmad, the director of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) at the time.

In early October 2001, Indian intelligence learned that Mahmoud had ordered flamboyant Saeed Sheikh - the convicted mastermind of the kidnapping and killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl - to wire US$100,000 from Dubai to one of hijacker Mohamed Atta's two bank accounts in Florida.

A juicy direct connection was also established between Mahmoud and Republican Congressman Porter Gross and Democratic Senator Bob Graham. They were all in Washington together discussing Osama bin Laden over breakfast when the attacks of September 11, 2001, happened.

Mahmoud's involvement in September 11 might be dismissed as only Indian propaganda. But Indian intelligence swears by it, and the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has confirmed the whole story: Indian intelligence even supplied Saeed's cellular-phone numbers. Nobody has bothered to check what really happened. The 9-11 Commission should pose very specific questions about it to FBI director Robert Mueller when he testifies this month.
...

On September 10, the Pakistani daily The News reported that the Mahmoud visit to the United States "triggered speculation about the agenda of his mysterious meetings at the Pentagon and National Security Council". If he'd been to the National Security Council, he had certainly met Rice. Mahmoud did meet with his counterpart, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director George Tenet. Tenet and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage had been in Islamabad in May, when Tenet had "unusually long" meetings with Musharraf. Armitage for his part has countless friends in the Pakistani military and the ISI. Mahmoud also met a number of high officials at the White House and the Pentagon and had a crucial meeting with Marc Grossman, the under secretary of state for political affairs. Rice maintains she did not meet Mahmoud then.

On the morning of September 11, Mahmoud was having a breakfast meeting at the Capitol with Graham and Goss. Goss spent as many as 10 years working on numerous CIA clandestine operations. He is very close to Vice President Dick Cheney. It's interesting to note that two weeks ago Goss suggested to the Justice Department to bring perjury charges against the new Cheney nemesis, Clarke. As it is widely known, Graham and Goss were co-heads of the joint House-Senate investigation that proclaimed there was "no smoking gun" as far as President George W Bush having any advance knowledge of September 11.

According to the Washington Post, and also to sources in Islamabad, the Mahmoud-Graham-Goss meeting lasted until the second plane hit Tower 2 of the World Trade Center. Graham later said they were talking about terrorism coming from Afghanistan, which means they were talking about bin Laden.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FD08Aa01.html

Is this the type of information that you are looking for?

[killtown]

20. Yes thanks, however I already have that listed

"108. Sen. Graham, Rep. Goss, and other US Intel committee members have meeting morning of 9/11 with Paki ISI director who had authorized $100,000 wire transfer to Atta. (Wall St Journal, Washington Post)"

If you think I missed any other relevant points to the story, please let me know. Thanks!

[WeedBug]

23. My Story

2 Days before the September 11 attacks I rang a nationwide talkback show in New Zealand. I forget how the conversation started but after only a couple of sentences I started saying "they dont think". I said this three times. Ill let you imagine who i was talking about. The next thing I did was yell at full volume "WAR" meaning there was going to be one. After this I gave a cry to tell about suffering (er youd have to hear it and what the host was saying) and then showed that I was giving the call everything I had and started saying "the thing, the thing" as a clue to why i was saying there was going to be a war. I finished the call by voicing a gleam in my eye, referring to there going to be a war and what i was saying about it. Err i guess you know what a gleam in ones eye means. So 2 days after yelling theres going to be war the planes hit the buildings. Theres more to the call than this like the host speaking and stuff but its obviously hard to type about a phone call and deliver the exactness of it. I made a point of showing I was giving it everything I had to express how there was going to be a war and everything in the call was to do with war. Umm, the translation of the call into text is a very poor example but i just wanted to post that and see if people have any comments. Like I said its not nearly as powerful as it would be to hear the actual call.

Thanks

[philb]

24. here is some documentation of the coverup

http://www.flcv.com/coverup.html

[kerry_s]

44. One big smoking gun for christmas

Well, I think that the title of your page is simply wrong, we can't find there any "smoking guns", only some "coincidences and oddities"

# Hijacker remains from Flight 77, 93 hijackers were identified at same military base and by a "process of elimination." (CBS)
# Dec 2001, Osama bin Laden reportedly dies. (FOX, Mirror UK, NY Times)

What does it have in common with 9/11???


But I find the smoking gun for you,
one, big, dirty smoking gun, which Lared can't simply throw to trash.

"911 Eyewitness" footage by Richard A. Siegel

http://media.thetruthseeker.org/911/v/911_Eyewitness.av...

What we can see and hear is shocking.

Explosions like thunders preceding collapse of WTC recorded live, some strange radio news about military copter exploding at Pentagon, a copter making strange flashes in smoke between towers just before the first collapse (WTC2) occured...

Explosions...

Internal explosions in WTC1...

This video is REALLY SHOCKING and some way change my view on 9/11.

Everything can be coincidence but not this.

Towers exploding like fireworks.

WTC7 falling quicker than free fall, with the same speed as in vacuum (~4,5 sec), without air resistance,

EXPLOSIONS

Why everybody is silent about this footage??????????
Nobody has a good connection to get this file from net???


I propose a new sections: examples of obstruction:
- confiscated videos,
- quick demolitions
- shutting up unconvenient people and media
- destroying physical evidence
- NEVER RELEASED PLANES MANIFESTS
- etc etc...

BTW, Killtown, when are you going to make subpages about Flight 11 & 175 and WTC 1&2 collapsing????????????????????????? And a section about patsies,
Your site is great but incomplete for me....

Many greetings:)))))))))))

[bloom]

47. link not working

:(

[killtown]

48. In due time

I'll be adding pages about 11, 175, WTC's. I just first picked the topics that I felt I was better at investigating. One of my next pages will be on flt 175, or I should say "flt 175"!

Well, I think that the title of your page is simply wrong, we can't find there any "smoking guns", only some "coincidences and oddities"

If you haven't noticed, I did change the title from "9/11 Smoking Guns" to "9/11 'Smoking Guns'." Most of my entries may not constitute a "smoking gun" as you would probably define, however when you have so many coincidence related to the same event, they stop being coincidences and become smoking guns.

Here is one "true" smoking gun for you:

Pentagon construction worker says on Larry King Live that plane that hit Pentagon had 'fewer engines' than the other 9/11 planes. (CNN)

________________________________

# Hijacker remains from Flight 77, 93 hijackers were identified at same military base and by a "process of elimination." (CBS)
# Dec 2001, Osama bin Laden reportedly dies. (FOX, Mirror UK, NY Times)

What does it have in common with 9/11???

Funny you mention these and ask when I am going to do a "section about patsies" when those two are in my "PATSIES, OPERATIVES..." 'smoking guns' section!

About the hijacker remains entry, it's evidence that the hijackers were never identified, so there in no proof there were on the plane! Also, one would expect the same military morgue used in a cover-up such as this.

About bin Laden's death, I did group it with another entry so it would be more clear:

Dec '01 - Osama bin Laden reportedly dies (FOX, Mirror UK, NY Times), Oct '04 - Video of OBL admitting to attacks is released 4 days before election and gives Bush a boost in polls. (ABC, NY Daily News, Zogby)

So obviously the 9/11 perps faked this OBL video if he had already died!

I do have a subsection on bombs/other explosions that will be in my next update shortly. Stay tuned!

[killtown]

45. New entry: Afghan invasion pre-9/11 politically impossible

141. War in Afghanistan would have been politically impossible pre-9/11. (USA Today)


Proves BushCo needed 9/11 to win political approval to invade Afghan.

[killtown]

46. Grouped: Motives - Afghanistan

140. July 2001, US plans to invade Afghanistan by October 2001 (BBC, Guardian),

Sept. 4 2001, White House approves plan to invade Afghanistan (CBS, USA Today),

Sept. 10, plan awaits Bush's approval (MSNBC),

Oct 2001, US invades Afghanistan. (DoD)

[killtown]

51. _________Up to 180+_________

Newest entries:

WTC ATTACK...

Bombs, other explosions

9/11 - Edmund McNally phoned his wife from 97th floor of WTC 2 following the plane crash, says he heard explosions below him. (NY Times)

9/11 - Firefighter Louie Cacchioli in elevator going to 24th floor hears a bomb go off and thinks bombs were set in the building. (People)

9/11 - Kim White from 80th floor of WTC 1 hears an explosion near the 74th floor. (People|2)

9/11 - EMT Joseph Lovero reports hearing 'additional explosions' to dispatcher. (WNBC)

9/11 - Tom Elliott on 67th floor floor in WTC 2 felt explosion below him as plane hit, firemen going up told him of an explosion near 60th floor. (CS Monitor)

9/11 - Witnesses reported hearing another explosion just before WTC 1 collapse, police said it looked almost like a 'planned implosion' designed to 'catch bystanders watching from the street.' (Guardian)

9/11 - Third explosion reported at WTC 2 (TCM News), there are reports that a part of the second tower has collapsed after the new explosion. (TCM News)



WTC 7

9/11 - Firefighter Scott Holowach says he and his crew were just 'hanging out' until tower WTC 7 came down and went right to work put the 7's fires out. (NY Times)

9/11 - Paramedic Steven Pilla says he and his crew didn't do any further because they were 'waiting' for WTC 7 to come down. (NY Times)

9/11 - Firefighter Lt William Ryan says he and his crew were told WTC 7 was going to collapse 'around 3 pm' and 'fell back' until it came down. (NY Times)

9/11 - Firefighter Frank Sweeney says he and his crew were sent back down near the WTC 7 and 'stood and waited' for it to come down. (NY Times)



PENNSYLVANIA CRASH...

9/11 - Witness at Flight 93 crash scene says there was nothing that could 'distinguish that a plane had crashed there.' (FOX video)



COVER-UP...

Jan '02 - Fire Engineering says official WTC investigation is a 'half-baked farce' that may already have been 'commandeered by political forces' whose primary interests lie 'far afield of full disclosure.' (Fire Engineering)

June '04 - 9/11 tapes reveal ground personnel covered-up attack response, kept things 'hush-hush.' (New York Observer)

July '04 - Almost 3 years after 9/11, technology only now exists to enable cell phones to work on airplanes at flying altitudes. (USA Today, New York Press)



MOTIVES...

1997 - CFR & Trilateral Comm member Zbigniew Brzezinski publishes a book urging the US to control the world's natural resources to maintain global domination despite public's uneasiness about US projecting external power and cautions it will become more difficult to get consensus on foreign policy with an increasingly diverse US society unless public perceives a massive direct external threat. (Brzezinski: 'Grand Chessboard'), Sept 14 - Council on Foreign Relation member Gary Hart says 9/11 attacks is chance for Bush to carry out a "new world order." (CFR)

Military budget increase:
* Sept '00 - PNAC calls to increase US defense budget, but says won't happen absent a catastrophic event like a "new Pearl Harbor." (ABC, PNAC)
* Sept 5, '01 - Rumsfeld asks Senate to approve new '02 defense budget which has largest spending increase since the mid 80's. (DoD)
* FY 2002 budget request is a $37.8 billion, or 11.5% increase from '01 request. (DoD)
* FY 2003 budget request is a $40.1 billion, or 10.9% increase from '02 request. (DoD)



Afghanistan

War in Afghanistan would have been politically impossible pre-9/11. (USA Today)



PATSIES, OPERATIVES...

Sept 16 - OBL denies 9/11 involvement in press release (Guardian), Sept 28 - OBL denies 9/11 involvement in 'Ummat' Paki newspaper, suggests Jews or US secret services behind attacks (Khilafah), Nov 7 - OBL denies 9/11 involvement in 'The Dawn' Paki newspaper. (Islam Online)

Framing

Sept 10 - Flight 93 hijacker Ziad Jarrah reportedly sends farewell letter and flight training documents to girlfriend of 5 years in Germany, but allegedly wrote address wrong and letter comes back and is passed to FBI; relatives say letter was fabricated to frame him. (BBC)

Sept 10 - Atta and two Arab men allegedly spew anti-American sentiments and leave a Quran and business card behind. (USA Today)

9/11 - Alleged Flight 11 hijackers Atta and Al-Omari caught on Portland, ME airport security video (ABC-AU, USA Today), Father says it's not Atta on security video. (PittsburgLive)

9/11 - Atta was only passenger among 81 people aboard Flight 11 whose luggage didn't make the flight and where found with incriminated evidence. (USA Today, WorldNetDaily)

9/11 - Press reports a group with 'Palestine' in the name claimed responsibility for attacks (CNN video), caught Israeli spy who was filming WTC burning says 'We are not your problem, Palestinians are the problem' (ABC), video shows Palestinians rejoicing over news of attacks (CNN Video, Israel Insider, LA Times), Palestinian celebrations were staged (Der Spiegel), '02 - Palestinian says Mossad sought to induce him to set up fake al Qaeda cell in Gaza and declare responsibility for various bombings. (Arabia Online)

Sept 28 - FBI claims to find Arabic written letter in Atta's suitcase and additional copies at Flight 93 crash site and in car registered to Flight 77 hijacker at Dulles parking lot. (FBI, PBS)


http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html

[rman]

52. MOTIVES

1948 - State Department decides the US should control the natural resources of Latin America, Europe should control the natural resources of Africa, for rebuilding after WW2.

As revealed in a now declassified document from the State Department;

What follows are excerpts from the famous debate between Noam Chomsky and Richard Perle at The Ohio State University in 1988 (http://www.radio4all.net/proginfo.php?id=8409).

In the debate Chomsky cites from now declassified documents from the State Department. Even an academic of high standing such as Noam Chomsky has a hard time getting access to such documents:

"One learns a lot from looking at the documentary record, and one learns a lot from the fact that certain people don't want you to look at it."
- Noam Chomsky

Chomsky makes a distinction between what he calls "official doctrine" - doctrine as created behind closed doors, and "widely proclaimed doctrine" - the policies as told to the public.
He notes that what's actually happening in the world (much of which goes unreported in the mainstream media) - ie US/Western support of various dictators and genocides, and the 'debt-trap' of so-called "Free Trade Agreements" - is in fact consistent with (secret) official doctrine, but inconsistent with publicly announced policies.

"Official doctrine is quite inconsistent with the historical and documentary record. (Official doctrine) conforms to the pattern of evolving events, and is entirely inconsistent with widely proclaimed doctrine."
- Noam Chomsky


Quotes from declassified State Department documents:

On the 3rd World:

"...a source of raw material and markets for the industrialist capitalist powers, to be exploited for their reconstruction"...

On Latin America:

"Prime concern is the protection of our raw materials. We have 50% of the worlds wealth but only 6% of its population, we must maintain this disparity to the extent possible, by force if necessary, putting aside vague and idealistic slogans such as human rights, raising of living standards, democratization, preferring police states if needed over democracies that might be to liberal and to indulgent to communists, the latter has lost any substantial meaning in US political rhetoric, referring simply to anyone who stands in our way."

"The primary threat to the US in Latin America is the trend towards nationalistic regimes that respond to popular demand for improvement in low living standards and production for domestic needs. That's not acceptable because the US is committed to encouraging a climate inductive to private investment, in particular guaranties for opportunity to earn and in the case of foreign capital to repatriate a reasonable return."

"We must therefore oppose what is regularly called ultra nationalism in secret documents, that means efforts to pursue domestic needs. We must foster exports or (...) production in the interests of US investors. It is recognized such programs have very little appeal to the Latin American public. So the conclusion is that we must therefore gain control over the military which can in turn control domestic opposition and overthrow civilian governments if necessary."

===

"There is a declassified State Department paper from 1948 that outlines what the US intended to do with various regions of the world after World War II. The US decided to take the Middle East and Asia. When it came to Africa, the document essentially says that we're not so interested in Africa, so we'll give it to the Europeans to "exploit"-that's the word used-for their reconstruction." - Chomsky
http://www.madre.org/articles/chomsky-0801.html

===

I. Fundamental Principles: Straight Power Concepts

The fundamental aims of Western foreign policy under American leadership, were stated in a now declassified top-secret planning report produced by the US State Department’s policy planning staff, headed at the time (February 1948) by the ‘liberal’ George Kennan: "We have about 50 per cent of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3 per cent of its population... In this situation, we cannot fail to be the object of envy and resentment. Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security. To do so we will have to dispense with all sentimentality and day-dreaming; and our attention will have to be concentrated everywhere on our immediate national objectives a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain’ the ‘position of disparity’ between the West and the rest of the world. We need not deceive ourselves that we can afford the luxury of altruism and world-benefaction... We should cease to talk about vague and... unreal objectives such as human rights, the raising of living standards, and democratization. The day is not far off when we will have to deal in straight power concepts. The less we are then hampered by idealistic slogans, the better.’
http://www.transcend.org/t_database/articles.php?ida=78

[killtown]

53. Do you know of a link to these State Dept docs?

[killtown]

55. Witnesses of bombs, explosions, & flashes at WTC

Will be up over 200 'smoking guns' by next week. Here are the latest:

(I'm sure Make7 will find a way to dismiss all these!)


- EMT Jeff Birnbaum near the South Tower says he heard an eerie high-pitched noise and a 'popping sound' then an explosion before the top of the tower leaned toward him and started coming down. (CEE News)

- Firefighter Louie Cacchioli in elevator going to 24th floor hears a bomb go off and thinks bombs were set in the building. (People)

- Firefighter Edward Cachia says the South Tower gave at a lower floor then where the plane hit because they thought there was internal explosions going off from hearing successions of 'boom, boom, boom, boom' before the tower came down. (NY Times)

- Fire Captain Karin Deshore says there was orange and red flashes followed by explosions that were getting bigger going both up and down and then all around the WTC 2. (SF Gate)

- Tom Elliott on 67th floor floor in WTC 2 felt explosion below him as plane hit, firemen going up told him of an explosion near 60th floor. (CS Monitor)

- Commissioner Stephen Gregory along with a Lieutenant Evangelista from Ladder 146 say they both saw multiple flashes coming from the lower level of the WTC 2 right before it collapsed and mentions the flashes they saw are like what you'd see when they 'blow up a building.' (NY Times)

- Nadine Keller from her balcony in Soho, NY says she 'heard the bomb' before she saw the buildings collapse. (BBC)

- EMT Joseph Lovero reports hearing 'additional explosions' to dispatcher. (WNBC)

- Edmund McNally phoned his wife from 97th floor of WTC 2 following the plane crash, says he heard explosions below him. (NY Times)

- Mike Pecoraro and co-worker here a loud explosion in WTC 1 basement and believes a bomb went off after seeing major damage to the basement floors. (Chief Engineer)

- Janitor William Rodriguez in WTC 1 basement hears explosion below him, then the plane crash above him seconds later, then saw severely burnt man come out of basement elevator. (CNN)

- Teresa Veliz on the 47th floor of the WTC 1 feels the building shake again more violently then the shaking from the 1st crash and hears explosions going off everywhere inside the building and also hears explosions when she was outside that she was convinced bombs were 'planted all over the place' and that someone was 'sitting at a control panel pushing detonator buttons.' (September 11: An Oral History)

- Kim White from 80th floor of WTC 1 hears an explosion near the 74th floor. (People)

- Witnesses reported hearing another explosion just before WTC 1 collapse, police said collapse looked almost like a 'planned implosion' designed to 'catch bystanders watching from the street.' (Guardian)

- Third explosion reported at WTC 2 and part of the tower collapses afterward. (TCM News)

[killtown]

56. ___200+ 9/11 'Smoking Guns'!!!

Newest entries:

PENTAGON ATTACK

Describing a missile...

9/11 - USA TODAY reporter Richard Benedetto says aircraft he saw hit the Pentagon 'sounded like an artillery shell.' (USA Today)

9/11 - Pentagon Renovation project coordinator Michael DiPaula says aircraft that hit the Pentagon 'sounded like a missile.' (Baltimore Sun)

9/11 - Space News editor Lon Rains was 'convinced a missile' hit the Pentagon by the way it sounded and how fast it flew in. (Space News)

9/11 - Pentagon network engineer Tom Seibert said he heard what 'sounded like a missile' crash into the building. (Guardian)


Describing aircraft very different than a Boeing 757...

9/11 - D. S. Khavkin says aircraft she and her husband saw fly overheard towards the Pentagon appeared to be a 'small' commercial aircraft. (BBC)

9/11 - Steve Patterson says aircraft he saw crash into pentagon appeared to hold about '8 to 12 people' and sounded like a 'fighter jet.' (Washington Post)

9/11 - USA Today Editor Joel Sucherman says he saw the body and tail of the aircraft that hit the Pentagon, but 'did not see the engines.' (CNN video)


Witnessed no plane at crash site...

9/11 - CNN reporter Jamie McIntyre live at the Pentagon scene says there's 'no evidence a plane crashed anywhere near the building.' (CNN video)

9/11 - Engineer Steve DeChiaro says he was perplexed that a plane had crashed into Pentagon by seeing only a small hole in the building and seeing 'no tail, wings, no nothing'. (Memphis Online)

9/11 - Army Captain Lincoln Liebner says remarkably there was 'no debris from the airplane' at the Pentagon when he got to the building. (Army)

9/11 - Army Captain Allan Lindsley says he was 100 meters from the Pentagon crash site and didn’t see 'any of the plane.' (Army)

9/11 - Nurse Eileen Murphy upon reaching the Pentagon crash scene says she was real surprised that the plane 'wasn't there.' (Army)

9/11 - Sergeant First Class Maybon Pollock says he was in awe that he saw 'nothing left from the plane' at the Pentagon crash site after being told the size of the plane that had crashed there. (Army)

9/11 - Will Jarvis of the Office of Secretary of Defense tried but failed to see the plane at the Pentagon saying there was just 'nothing left' and couldn’t see a 'tail or a wing or anything.' (U of T Magazine)


Smelled explosives, heard multiple explosions...

9/11 - Pentagon attorney Gilah Goldsmith said she smelled cordite, or gun smoke near the crash site. (Jewish News Weekly)

9/11 - Don Perkal of the Office of Secretary of Defense said he heard two explosions minutes apart and heard that a bomb had gone off in the building and when he smelled cordite, he says he knew 'explosives had been set off somewhere'. (McSweeney's)

http://www.geocities.com/killtown/911smokingguns.html