Thursday, May 17, 2007

Mass Murder and High Treason

There are glaring discrepancies surrounding Bush's activities on the morning of 911. At the very least, George W. Bush is the liar we know him to be. At worst, the discrepancies may lead one to conclude that Bush knew about the events of 911 well in advance and did absolutely nothing.

The timeline of his travels depicts a man trying to stay out of the line of fire. It does not portray a President concerned with the lives of American citizens. It does not portray a "commander-in-chief" or a "decider". It portrays a weak-kneed wimp at the mercy of his "handlers", the real power behind the throne. Or - should I say "dictatorship"?

His false statements concerning his activities on that day raise doubts not only about his credibility but also the possibility that the President of the United States is complicit in mass murder and high treason.

Let's look at the time line which becomes a chronology of incredible coincidences, a literal round up of the usual suspects.
(8:00 a.m.): Former President George H. W. Bush Heads off After Spending Night at the White House

Former President George H. W. Bush, along with former First Lady Barbara Bush, leaves Washington, DC, by private jet, bound for a speaking engagement in St. Paul, Minnesota. The Bushes spent the previous night at the White House. They had flown to Washington the previous day to attend several meetings and a dinner. One of the meetings attended by the former president was the annual investor conference of the Carlyle Group, which was also attended by Shafig bin Laden, one of Osama bin Laden’s brothers (see (9:00 a.m.) September 11, 2001). They are later informed of the WTC attacks while on their jet. Due to all planes being grounded, they have to land in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. [CBS News, 11/1/2002; Newsweek, 10/20/2003; CNN, 10/25/2003]
But things get even weirder and there are no innocent explanations.

George W. Bush left his Florida hotel about 8:35 AM. But, according to ABC News, just before leaving the hotel, reporters saw Andy Card whispering into Bush's ear. The topic of whispered conversation, according to the network, was the stunning events taking place in New York.

But the first plane did not crash into the north tower until 8:45 AM. "What was going on in New York" was not yet going on when Bush and Card talked about it. Yet, we are led to believe that Card and Bush discussed an event that would not take place for another ten minutes or so.

Much later, Bush would claim that while at the school in Florida, he saw the first plane crash the north tower on a TV that had been set up for him. How convenient!

The only known footage of that event was not broadcast until the next day. Presumably, no one knew it was going to happen. Or did they? Bush, however, made his claim on two occasions leading one to believe that this was not a mere slip of the tongue. The verbatim transcripts are still available at the White House web site. Nor was Bush referring to the crash of the second plane into the south tower. He is video taped being given that information by Card while still in the classroom. [depicted under the headline] Even Bush is not likely to have forgotten that.

If Bush told the truth about seeing a plane crash the north tower on live TV, it could only have been on monitors getting a feed from cameras placed in anticipation of an attack. If Bush is telling the truth about seeing the first plane, then he most certainly would have seen it on the TV depicted in the photos above. This is a room at the school where Bush had read goat stories to children, where Andy Card was seen in stills and in video informing Bush: "[The] second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack." Though Card is often quoted as having said "A second plane", Bush himself attributes to Andy Card the word "the". I find the use of the word "the" in this context to be interesting and revelatory.

Look closely at the above monitors. It has been pointed out to me that there is no network logo or "graphics bar" running across the bottom of the TV screen, though it clearly depicts the WTC. If it were a network feed, the network logo would be present. If it was, indeed, a closed circuit set up that Bush had seen, there might not be one. Clearly, there is no logo depicted above.

If Bush merely lied that is one thing. But consider the implications if Bush had, in fact, viewed a closed-circuit broadcast with cameras placed in advance delivering a signal that might be viewed by a complicit President. If that is the case, then Bush is not merely a liar as we know him to be. He is much more besides. He is a murderous traitor, complicit in mass murder, a conspirator to high treason.

Why Conservatives Hate America

Spread the word:

yahoo icerocket pubsub newsvine


damien said...

I added my two cents worth on this topic previously here. Few people know that Bush was subject to an apparent assassination attempt on 9/11 that was either real or a staged propaganda exercise that was never used by the admin. There's a lot of questions about Bush's actions (or lack of them) on 9/11.

Len Hart said...

As usual, damien, great links. I still have hopes that one day the truth of Bush's illegitimate regime will become widely known. And your toils will not have been in vain. Thanks.

liberal journal man said...

Just the tip of the iceberg...

Can't wait for Loose Change to be mass released. But don't say this on KOS or other mainstream sites, because then you're a "conspiracy theorist."

Len Hart said...

But don't say this on KOS or other mainstream sites, because then you're a "conspiracy theorist."

You are correct and I am sick to death of it. Merely labeling something a "conspiracy theory" is a dopey, sloppy mindless fallacy and cop out.

MOST crimes are conspiratorial in nature. After all, what can one person accomplish that can't be done better with a team.

St. Thomas More called commerce itself a "conspiracy" among members of the monied class to "procure their commodities in the name of the commonwealth"

And last time I checked, something like 90 percent of SCOTUS decisions involved "conspiracy" of one sort or another. Someone should have told the Justices of the high court to save their time. Conspiracies don't really exist.

I suggest that those who don't believe conspiracies exist go to FINDLAW, a prestigious law web portal. Even a cursory search will turn up thousands of US Codes having to do with conspiracies.

It's incredible that Congress would have spent so much time on a matter than does not even exist.

damien said...

Killtown has a comprehensive analysis of Bush's movements on 9/11.

Andrew Card is alleged to have said to Bush: "[The] second plane hit the second tower. America is under attack." I wouldn't place too much stock by that. The video records this conversation as taking two seconds and it is not possible to make that particular remark in that time. So we know Card said something else.

You make a good point, Len, about the TV footage with no logos. I didn't know that. I would imagine that the Presidential Security Service would have had a standing arrangment with the main media groups to provide raw feed in the event of serious national emergencies. It may be that's what Bush was watching at the school. We know from Richard Clarke in his book, Against All Enemies, that the Secret Service monitored FAA radar screens in real time. And that the FAA advised NORAD of the hijacking of Flight 11 at 8:40 and Flight 175 at 8:43 (there is evidence of earlier phone link ups). The Security Service would have had all that information in real time. So when Bush entered the school the Security Service already knew at least two commercial airlines had been hijacked. Coming after Tenet's visit to Bush in Texas a few weeks earlier, and following a spate of warnings from foreign governments about an impending massive al Qaeda attack, there would have been absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe the hijackings were anything other than a serious terrorist attack.

On a personal note, on 9/11 at 10.58pm (here in Australia - 8.58am NY time) they broke into our TV news service to say an airliner had crashed into a building in the US. By 11.01 am (9.01am NY time) 3 of our 5 stations were feeding the vision from New York. I watched Flight 175 crash into the South Tower in real time. Anyone with half a brain could understand immediately that this was a planned attack. The Security Service would have known well before that.

So why was Bush allowed to sit in that school till 9.30am while America was clearly under terrorist attack?

The official answer is that (i) everything happened so fast, and (ii) no-one knew exactly the nature of the situation. Really? Half the world was watching and can tell what's going on, but not the Security Service?

In answer to (i) Robin Horden, an air traffic controller, has shown that errant commercial flights were intercepted by US fighter aircraft on a weekly, almost daily basis, for several years - all within 15 minutes. Yet on 9/11, 4 hijacked aircraft flew around unattended for 90 minutes! We still don't know why.

In answer to (ii) the various intelligence warnings have been well documented. Tenet's 'hair was on fire' over the warnings. Bush had been told that massive attacks were coming. After the very first hijacking the attack would have been clear to officials. Bush had no excuse for sitting in that school room - unless, of course, his political handlers had decided to keep him there for strategic reasons.

The practical effect - intended or otherwise - of President Bush’s extended stay at the elementary school till 9.30am was to give credibility to the later unsatisfactory explanations for the failure of US air defences on 911.

I've made this case in more detail here.

There's some other curiosities. When Bush arrived at Booker and people started talking to him, one of the first was Karl Rove. I mentioned the alleged assassination attempt against Bush on 9/11 (which was almost certainly not real, raising the question of why the admin was too overwhelmed on 9/11 to intercept the terrorists yet they could find the time to generate propaganda about an attack on Bush). There is an interesting quote from here:

During this flight, the President received a message that indicated that he would be a target. This information is provided by the Whitehouse - that there may have been a plan to assassinate the president – but no subsequent information about this threat has ever been released.

"White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said there was "real and credible information that the White House and Air Force One were targets." [White House, 9/12/01] On September 13, New York Times columnist William Safire wrote - and Bush's political strategist Karl Rove confirmed - that there was an "inside" threat that "may have broken the secret codes (showing a knowledge of presidential procedures)." [New York Times, 9/13/01]

"In the New York Times on September 13, entitled “Inside the Bunker,” Safire described a conversation with an unnamed “high White House official,” who told him, “A threatening message received by the Secret Service was relayed to the agents with the president that ‘Air Force One is next.’” Safire continued: “According to the high official, American code words were used showing a knowledge of procedures that made the threat credible.” Safire reported that this information was confirmed by Rove, who told him Bush had wanted to return to Washington but the Secret Service “informed him that the threat contained language that was evidence that the terrorists had knowledge of his procedures and whereabouts.”

The idea that "secret codes" had been broken seems to me to be media spin from someone like Rove. The Bush "assassination" saga has every appearance of a complete fabrication, to be used as propaganda according to how the day developed and the public response. It joins other curious contradictions like the White House staff all taking Cipro on 9/11 in case of an anthrax attack. These details just spring "out of the ether" on 9/11. They have no connection to al Qaeda or the 9/11 terrorists at all. Unless we are to attribute to bin Laden and al Qaeda a level of organization and penetration of US Intelligence, for which there is no official support, these details are highly suggestive of involvement by senior US officials in the events of 9/11. Or at least a willingness to massively mislead the public over the details of 9/11.

I want to strongly recommend to readers the Heidner Report. This is a fascinating document. It contains innumerable factual details on 9/11, the terrorists and their connections, the Nick Berg murder and a host of related topics. All the facts that I've been able to assess there appear to be true. The author draws some disputable conclusions from some of those facts, but I can say that this is one of the most helpful reads I've ever found on 9/11 and I recommend it strongly. The author says that 9/11 was essentially a Mossad operation. Readers can draw their own conclusions. The details are eye-popping. This on Huffmann Aviation:

The Huffman Flight School garners the most media attention, for at least three reasons. First, it was the primary training school for Mohammed Atta and four of his reported ‘cell member’ colleagues from Hamburg. Second, it is also known that recruiting for the school was actively conducted by Yeslam Bin Laden, brother of Osama Bin Laden. Third, the school has an intriguing story behind its ownership. Actual financial ownership of the school has not been thoroughly documented, but the consensus appears to be that it was under the ownership of Oryx Investments, an investment holding company formed in Dubai by Adnan Khashoggi, Sheik Kamal Adham, director of Saudi intelligence (1963-79), and Wallace J. Hilliard.

He goes on to make connections between Hilliard and Neil Bush via business partners Mark Shubin and Kenneth Good.

The 9/11 discrepancies are not just about buildings and planes. They're also about agencies (NORAD, the Security Service, FBI, CIA) that failed in spectacular ways beyond any reasonable explanation. It's about time people had some real answers.

whig said...

The Republican party is a criminal conspiracy. PNAC is a criminal conspiracy. Isn't that obvious by now?

marain said...

I just wanted to thank you for bringing up this topic in your blog and I hope you will revisit it on a regular basis in the future. IMO, the official version of 9/11 has been used, unashamedly, to drive the policies of the last six years and what really happened on 9/11 is the key to seeing clearly the criminality of the current administration. Thank you for your courage. Please keep writing.

Len Hart said...

marain said...

I just wanted to thank you for bringing up this topic in your blog and I hope you will revisit it on a regular basis in the future.

Thanks for dropping in on the "Cowboy". Indeed, this is a tricky topic. Damien (whose post I am sure you read) has, over a period of over two years, left numerous links to some incredible information.

Lack of time has prevented me from creating a searchable data base of his links with labels and summary descriptions. That kind of thing would also require an SQL server and an interface that is just not available on blogspot or similar blog formats.

I believe that such a data base would make it easier to "connecct the dots" and recover needed information with specific queries rather than an endless list of links.

On the whole, I've tried to concentrate on the glaring holes in Bush's "official conspircy theory". Like the JFK assassination, it is a mistake to go too far afield. The trick is knowing what is relevant and what is chaff thrown up by those with evil agendas.

It must never be forgotten that Bush obstructed every effort to begin an investigation of 911 and, when it was at last underway, he sought to neuter it.

Anonymous said...

I have seen the Bush's board many Gulfstream Jets from Prudential Aviation, - believe me these are the finest and newest aircraft around - so at least give them credit for using the best!

Len Hart said...


Thanks for that great's been very busy of late and I am just now catching up on comments.

Thanks for the great timeline and the terrific links. I especially liked your chonology and it deserves a very careful read. The nagging questions are even more nagging. The detail chronology supports some very disturbing conclusions that I mat jump into one day.