Just What Hit The Pentagon?







For years, I have been skeptical of the 9/11 conspiracy theories. But recent evidence and calls to the new administration to open up a reinvestigation have convinced me that the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon, at least by an airliner, was a fabrication. Take a look at these videos and tell us what you think.



Phantoms and Monsters


Another Israeli 9/11 Connection: Cousin of Hijacker Exposed as Mossad Spy


Another Israeli intelligence connection to 2001 attacks on New York and Washington.

The cousin of alleged 9/11 hijacker Ziad al-Jarrah has been exposed as a long standing Israeli spy in yet another startling intelligence connection between the Zionist state and the attacks on New York and Washington.

A New York Times report details how Ali al-Jarrah was a highly valued spy for Israel for no less than 25 years, sending reports and taking clandestine photographs of Palestinian groups and Hezbollah since 1983.

According to the article, “From his home in this Bekaa Valley village, Mr. Jarrah, 50, traveled often to Syria and to south Lebanon, where he photographed roads and convoys that might have been used to transport weapons to Hezbollah, the Shiite militant group, investigators say. He spoke with his handlers by satellite phone, receiving “dead drops” of money, cameras and listening devices. Occasionally, on the pretext of a business trip, he traveled to Belgium and Italy, received an Israeli passport, and flew to Israel, where he was debriefed at length, investigators say.”

To emphasize how highly regarded he was by Israel, Israeli officials even assured Jarrah that his town would be spared at the outset of the 2006 Lebanon-Israel conflict and that it was safe for him to stay at home.

“I never suspected him before,” said Raja Mosleh, the Palestinian doctor who was his partner for years in a school and health clinic. “But now, after linking all the incidents together, I feel he’s 100 percent guilty.”

Despite living the life of an apparent downtrodden pauper and sympathizing with the plight of the Palestinians, Jarrah was actually in receipt of over $300,000 for his work from Israel.Jarrah’s brother Yusuf was also accused of being a spy by Lebanese officials and arrested with Jarrah last July.

Which other members of the Jarrah family were working for Israel as intelligence assets? Surely not Ziad al-Jarrah, one of the infamous “laughing hijackers” and the alleged pilot of Flight 93?

Al-Jarrah’s paper passport was one of those that miraculously survived to be legible, apparently avoiding being consumed by fires that were so intense that it took over 6 months just to identify the actual victims of Flight 93.

Israeli intelligence connections to 9/11 can be traced back to the five “dancing Israelis” who were witnessed setting up video camera equipment pointed at the World Trade Center in New York before the first plane hit the tower. The men were seen jumping and high-fiving with shouts of “joy and mockery” as Flight 11 and Flight 175 slammed into the buildings. They were later seen posing for photographs in front of the debris.

After the men were arrested, the FBI discovered maps of New York City with certain places highlighted, box cutters (the same items that the hijackers supposedly used), $4700 cash stuffed in a sock, and foreign passports.

There were also Israeli news reports that the men were driving a white van packed with explosives that were intended to be detonated on the George Washington bridge.

The men were found to have been working for a removal company called Urban Moving Systems, the owner of which immediately fled the U.S. for Israel after the attacks and was subsequently placed on an FBI terror suspect list.

As the What Really Happened website notes, “The Jewish weekly The Forward reported that the FBI finally concluded that at least two of the detained Israelis were agents working for the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, and that Urban Moving Systems, the ostensible employer of the five Israelis, was a front operation. This was confirmed by two former CIA officers, and they noted that movers’ vans are a common intelligence cover. The Israelis were held in custody for 71 days before being quietly released.”

Ziad al-Jarrah infamously appeared in the “laughing hijackers” video with alleged lead hijacker Mohammed Atta, which was released by Pentagon front group IntelCenter in October 2006. The tape showed Atta and Jarrah allegedly attending a 2000 Al-Qaeda meeting and reading their last will and testament.

Segments of the video that were interspersed with footage of the “laughing hijackers,” Jarrah and Atta, showing Bin Laden giving a speech to an audience in Afghanistan on January 8 2000, were culled from what terror experts described as surveillance footage taken by a “security agency.”

News reports at the time contained the admission that the U.S. government had been in possession of the footage since 2002, while others said it was found when the United States invaded Afghanistan in 2001, and yet it was still bizarrely reported that the tape, bearing all the hallmarks of having been filmed and edited by undercover US intelligence and having admittedly been in US possession for five years, was released over the weekend of September 31/October 1 by “Al-Qaeda”.

The video also contained segments that were first broadcast in a British documentary called The Road to Guantanamo, which was originally aired in March 2006. The context of the corresponding scene in the dramatized documentary featured U.S. interrogators attempting to coerce Gitmo detainees into confessing Al-Qaeda membership by showing them fake videos where their likeness had been computer generated to appear as if they were in attendance during Bin Laden’s January 8 2000 speech.

Ziad al-Jarrah was questioned by UAE authorities at the request of the CIA in January 2001, eight months before 9/11, about his alleged terrorist activities, but was subsequently released.

CONTINUED EVIDENCE



The Citizen Investigation Team talk with eye witnesses about the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon.Their testimonies contradict the official story as they describe how the plane flew over the North side of the Citgo station.





Citizen Investigation Team confront cab driver Lloyd England again about the lack of damage to his Taxi on 911 after new evidence proving the plane's flight path was north of his location which contradicts his testimony.



April Gallup, 9/11 Pentagon Eyewitness

This footage was originally shot for inclusion into "911 Ripple Effect." The footage never made it into the documentary.

Upon request from April Gallup the footage was shelved. The excuse given was never very clear, but the results were that the footage was never released.

Now that Ripple Effect has been out for a while, I've decided to release the footage. April makes some surprising observations and comments about the attack on the Pentagon. Please help spread this video around.

Sincerely,
William Lewis
Producer/Director: 911 RIPPLE EFFECT

______________________


The Suppression of Video Footage of the Pentagon Attack

It is striking that there is neither video footage nor any photographic evidence in the public domain showing a jetliner approaching or crashing into the Pentagon. As of May, 2006, the only video footage of the crash that has been released are clips from two Pentagon security cameras north of the crash site, one the source of 5 frames leaked in 2002.

With the release of the two video clips, the Pentagon claims to have supplied all of the footage it has of the attack. Although the number and positions of security cameras monitoring the Pentagon is not public knowledge, it seems unlikely that only two security cameras captured the attack. Isn't it reasonable to assume that there were dozens, if not hundreds, of security cameras ringing the huge building that is the heart of the United States military establishment?

Videos Outside the Pentagon Seized

The Sheraton National Hotel may be the hotel from which the FBI seized a CCTV recording.

Not only has the government refused to release footage that would clearly show how the Pentagon was attacked, it has also seized footage not belonging to the military. The FBI confiscated video recordings from several private businesses near the Pentagon in the immediate aftermath of the attack. Those recordings, if they still exist, might provide decisive evidence about the attack.

* The FBI visited a hotel near the Pentagon to confiscate film from a security camera which some hotel employees had been watching in horror shortly after the attack. The FBI denied that the footage captured the attack.

* The FBI visited the Citgo gas station southwest of the Pentagon within minutes of the attack to confiscate film that may have captured the attack. According to Jose Velasquez, who was working at the gas station at the time of the attack, the station's security cameras would have captured the attack.

In addition it is likely there is other video footage that was either destroyed or is being withheld, given that the trajectory of the attack plane took it low over a large part of Arlington, Virginia.

Lawsuits to Obtain Videos

At least two plaintiffs have attempted to obtain videos seized by the FBI, using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The first, documented at Flight77.info, began with a request to the FBI in October of 2004. The second, undertaken by the Judicial Watch, Inc. began with a request to the Department of Defense (DOD) in December of 2004. Following is a timeline of the requests and subsequent lawsuits. Entries relating to the second case are distinguished with dates colored gray.

* October 14, 2004: Scott A. Hodes, on behalf of his client Scott Bingham, sends a request to David Hardy of the FBI requesting any videos "that may have captured the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001". The request letter mentions videotapes from the Citgo Gas Station and the Sheraton National Hotel.

* November 3, 2004: The FBI replies to Bingham's request stating that their search "revealed no record responsive to your FOIA request".

* November 17, 2004: Hodes files an appeal of Bingham's FOIA request with the U.S Department of Justice (DOJ), citing evidence that the videotapes mentioned in the original request exist.

* December 15, 2004: Christopher J. Farrell of Judicial Watch, Inc. writes to James Hogan in the Office of Freedom of Information/Security Review of the DOD requesting that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), DOD, and FBI produce:

any and all agency records concerning, relating to, or reflecting the following subjects:

(1) Video camera recordings obtained by federal official(s) and/or law enforcement from a Nexcomm/Citgo gas station in the vicinity of the Pentagon on or about September 11, 2001.

(2) Pentagon security video camera recording(s) showing Flight 77 strike and/or hit and/or crash into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.

(3) Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) video camera recording(s) obtained by any federal official(s) and/or law enforcement from the Virginia Department of Transportation ("VDOT") and/or the VDOT "Smart Traffic Center" on or about September 11, 2001.

* March 7, 2005: The DOJ replies to Hodes' November 17 appeal, admitting that it did possess records responsive to the request but that it could release the records because such a release "could reasonably be expected to interfere with law enforcement proceedings."

* January 26, 2005: The DOD advises Judicial Watch, Inc. that it possesses a videotape responsive to the December 15, 2004 request but declines to produce the videotape, citing U.S.C 552(b)(7)(A).

* March 8, 2005: Bingham's attorney files a lawsuit with the United States District Court for the District of Columbia stating that the FBI is in violation of the FOIA for "failing to adequately respond to plaintiff's FOIA request, including failing to adequately search for and release records that the plaintiff believes the agency is in possession of, and for failing to timely respond to the plaintiff's administrative appeal."

* April 18, 2005: The DOJ files a response to Bingham's March 8 lawsuit denying the plaintiff's request and asking the judge to dismiss the plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice.

* April 19, 2005: District Judge Paul L. Friedman orders the defendants to file a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment in the case brought by Bingham on or before June 21, 2005.

* June 10, 2005: The DOD denies Judicial Watch's administrative appeal, claiming that the video is exempt as part of an ongoing investigation involving Zacarias Moussaoui.

* August 1, 2005: Jeffrey D. Kahn, an attorney for the DOJ's Civil Division files a 23-page MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. Scans of the document are posted on Flight77.info.

* August 29, 2005: Hodes files a Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and a STATEMENT OF FACT ON WHICH THERE EXIST A GENUINE ISSUE TO BE LITIGATED in response to the DOJ's motion for summary judgment.

* September 9, 2005: Kahn files a REPLY BRIEF IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

* September 9, 2005: Special Agent Jacqueline Maguire of the FBI's Counterterrorism Division files a DECLARATION describing her search for records responsive to Bingham's FOIA request. Maguire admits to determining that 85 videotapes in the FBI's possession are "potentially responsive" the request, that she personally viewed 29 of the tapes, and that she located only one videotape that showed the impact of Flight 77 into the Pentagon. Maguire also refers to "one videotape taken from a closed circuit television at a Doubletree Hotel in Arlington Virginia," but states that it did not show the impact of Flight 77.

* September 26, 2005: Hodes files a request seeking "copies of 85 videotapes in the possession of the FBI described in the declaration of Special Agent Jacqueline Maguire dated September 7, 2005.

* October 20, 2005: The DOJ sends a letter to Hodes claiming that the requested material is exempt.

* October 24, 2005: Hodes appeals the DOJ's October 20 claim that its material is exempt.

* February 22, 2006: Judicial Watch, Inc. files a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the Department of Defense for its refusal to disclose records sought under the FOIA request.

* May 5, 2006: Judge Friedman orders the defendants to show cause on or before May 26, 2006 why their motion for summary judgment should not be denied as moot, noting that the criminal proceedings against Moussaoui have ended.

* May 16, 2006: Judicial Watch obtains two videos from the DOD, and posts them on their website. The site is down for about half of the day due to demand.

* September 15, 2006: Judicial Watch announces the release of video from CITGO gas station. The video consists mostly of views of the interior of the gas station and does not appear to capture the attack.

* December 2, 2006: Judicial Watch obtains a video recording from the Doubletree Hotel in Arlington. The video, which does not include a view of the Pentagon's facade, shows an explosion but does not capture an approaching jetliner.


Phantoms and Monsters
Wiki Home