I can buy the “Bush let the attacks happen” idea – the required conspiracy there isn’t anywhere near as large, and so secrecy could be maintained. But planting explosives throughout the building is just beyond credibility.

Why don’t you ask Taibbi to name the “foreign governments”, indicated by Senators Graham and Dorgan, which participated in the 9/11 attacks on America — and have him explain why keeping their identities “classified” is not the Constitutional definition of “treason.”

“The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To urge the President to release information regarding
sources of foreign support for the 9-11 hijackers)

At the appropriate place, insert the following:
Sec. . Sense of the Senate on declassifying portions of
the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001.
(a) Findings.–The Senate finds that–
(1) The President has prevented the release to the American public of 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001.
(2) The contents of the redacted pages discuss sources of foreign support for some of the September 11th hijackers while they were in the United States.
(3) The Administration’s decision to classify this
information prevents the American people from having access to information about the involvement of certain foreign governments in the terrorist attacks of September 2001.
(4) The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has requested that the President release the 28 pages.
(5) The Senate respects the need to keep information
regarding intelligence sources and methods classified, but the Senate also recognizes that such purposes can be
accomplished through careful selective redaction of specific words and passages, rather than effacing the section’s
contents entirely.
(b) Sense of the Senate.–It is the sense of the Senate
that in light of these findings the President should declassify the 28-page section of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the
Terrorist Attacks of September 2001 that deals with foreign sources of support for the 9-11 hijackers, and that only
those portions of the report that would directly compromise ongoing investigations or reveal intelligence sources and
methods should remain classified.

-Congressional Record: October 28, 2003 (Senate)
Page S13349-S13372

“SEN. BOB GRAHAM: Yes, going back to your question about what was the greatest surprise. I agree with what Senator Shelby said the degree to which agencies were not communicating was certainly a surprise but also I was surprised at the evidence that there were foreign governments involved in facilitating the activities of at least some of the terrorists in the United States.”
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/congress/july-dec02/intelligence_12-11.html

“Phone records revealed Bayoumi called local Saudi officials, including the consulate in San Diego, 34 times. He called Saudi officials in Washington D.C. 141 times in the same period, according to the memo — more than twice a day on average.”

California Resident Who Helped 9/11 Hijackers Was Closely Linked To Saudi Government
http://intelwire.egoplex.com/2008_02_19_exclusives.html

2002-04-15: FBI Letterhead Memorandum, Omar Al Bayoumi Contacts With Saudi Government
http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2002-04-15-FBI-LHM-omar-al-bayoumi2.pdf

PS – POLL

http://www.misterpoll.com/polls/360618

You’re welcome. And thanks for the tip on where to find Ames. BTW, i agree with Ann @2.

Regarding Ames, the demise of the eXile seems to have rejuvenated his career. He’s now a regular at places like Radar and the Nation.

Hahaha… the worst that could happen to you here Russ is someone following up your post with a mocking refutation pointing out how ignorant and unpersuasive a creature of passion you are. It shan’t come from me.

Your post, despite me being a big Taibbi fan, is a damned good one by the way.

Rice told Congress “we had no idea it could have happened”. Then answers the question of the title of the “daily brief” as “bin Laden determined to strike within the United States”.

Rice tells Congress “I don’t think anyone could have imagined someone using planes as missiles”, yet Cheney was running that exact combat simulation that day. In fact, they claim that the reason the jets weren’t properly deployed is because they didn’t know if it was “real or exercise”. CLEARLY, the administration responsible for our protection that day COULD imagine such a scenario, they were WAR GAMING IT.

Not before or since has ANY plane been off it’s flight path for more than a few minutes before fighter jets intercepted. Yet, on that one day.. not 1, but 4 planes were off course for over an HOUR.. There’s the rebuttal that “their transponders were off, no one knew where they were”, but there’s footage of radar contact with the planes, they knew EXACTLY where “planes with no transponders” were, and where they were going.

Not 1.. not 2.. but 3 buildings fell at free fall speed that day.

dozens and dozens of “on the street” reports of “multiple explosions” just before the buildings started falling.

Why were the bomb sniffing dogs taken off their inspections 2 weeks before the attack?

Isn’t it very convenient for Rumsfeld that the building holding the paperwork that showed where his missing $3 trillion dollars was was destroyed that day, but not hit by planes? Rummy was before Congress the day before trying to explain where that money had gone.

The guy running the Sept. 11 commission was a ardent Bush supporter. The commission needed unanimous consent to put information into the report… and the Chair was the sole veto voice on many facts that the public never got to hear about, and the commission just ignored Tower 7. The whole thing wreaks of a cover up for massive failures, if nothing else.

I don’t know that it was an “inside job”, but it sure seems plausible. What seems LIKELY to me is that our leaders at a minimum let it happen. Just like the bombing of Pearl Harbor.

What bothers me is the most criminal and secretive Administration in American history ran a white wash commission on the whole thing, and we might never find out the truth.

Who was really behind the attacks on the World Trade Center? Are we really sure it was bin Laden? And even if it was bin Laden — do we even know who he is, really?

There was something incredibly suspicious about the rapid announcement on the part of the United States that Osama bin Laden, a figure the world had scarcely heard of before 1998, was responsible for the New York and Washington attacks. Less than eight hours after the attack, CNN — acting on leaks from unnamed Washington sources that there were “strong indications” of bin Laden’s guilt — had already exonerated some six billion suspects of the crime, and settled on the shadowy cleric.

More importantly, there was the fact that so many of the people who were telling us that the culprit was bin Laden were long ago proven to be completely without credibility when it comes to terrorism and identification of the enemy. The first night of CNN coverage featured Richard Holbrooke, who lied to the world about Rambouillet, and a parade of ex — Iran-Contra Defendants, who previously covered up their own ties to terrorist states. Osama bin Laden himself was once a beneficiary of U.S. government funding, a fact that is now being carefully covered up in the American media. Take, for example, this bio of the Enemy published in The Christian Science Monitor last week: . . .

You can read the whole article here: http://exile.ru/articles/detail.php?ARTICLE_ID=6292&IBLOCK_ID=35

Why Taibbi changed his tune i don’t know. Perhaps David Ray Griffin should have asked him.

As i see it, we are basically choosing between two conspiracy theories. The only significant difference is that one is proposed by the United States government.

When individuals refuse to listen to an alternative history of 9/11 — or even to consider that one could exist –- they’re not revealing their view of the event, but of themselves. They fear squandering their precious store of credibility, which they think could result in not only the marginalization of their voices, but of their place in society itself.

I did get a kick out of when Taibbi claimed in his profession there needs to be an element of truth to be accepted by the whole community, and that he isn’t free to just spout any sort of nonsense. Man, did I laugh…