Saturday, April 01, 2006

[political-research] Bloglines - I almost don't want to post this...

Bloglines user bill.giltner@gmail.com has sent this item to you, with the following personal message:

Sean (and whoever else think Cannon has credibility),

Read this over. I ask you. Has Cannon man studied the collapse of Towers 1 and 2? Has this man studied the Pentagon non-Jetliner crash? Has he seen the evidence that the Naudet Bros. were pre-position and submitted fake video.? (The list goes on and on.)

Why is he taking such a glib wtc7 attitude? Can you or anyone take what you know about what really happened on 9/11 and still think this kind of piece by Cannon is anything except disinfo?


CANNONFIRE
Joseph Cannon (cannonfiremail@yahoo.com)

I almost don't want to post this...

By Joseph

...because we all know what what happens every time the dreaded acronym WTC7 appears on any web site. Look, guys, if you must bark like rabid dogs about controlled demolition theories, there are plenty of other places you can go. Lots of blogs have higher traffic than this one does.

My purpose here is to discuss another mystery concerning 7 World Trade Center. Is it possible to do so without the "bomb-in-da-building" zealots seizing upon any excuse to proselytize the faith?

A few years ago, the brief New York Times report that the CIA had offices within that structure intrigued me, so I tried to find out more. Those findings deserve some presence on the net, even if the matter does not, in the final analysis, carry tremendous weight. What follows below the asterisks is yet another chunk from my yet-unpublished piece on WTC7 (the final version of which will have complete footnotes):

* * *

The Spooks of 7 World Trade Center


Of all the government agencies which called 7 World Trade Center home, one name rivets the attention of parapolitical researchers: The Central Intelligence Agency.

Only those “in the know” can say which of the building’s offices housed the CIA. That famed three-letter acronym did not appear in the lobby directory, nor did it appear on any phone bill sent to that address. The Company did not advertise its presence in New York City because the CIA’s charter prohibits domestic operations. Of course, the Agency’s interpretation of that charter may differ from yours or mine.

According to James Risen, the New York Times journalist who broke this story, “The agency's New York station was behind the false front of another federal organization, which intelligence officials requested that The Times not identify.” I was not a party to this deal, and I have never understood why the American taxpayer should remain forever ignorant of data which foreign intelligence organizations must consider old news. Two sources – one of them a private detective based in New York City – have informed me that the CIA has often used the Defense Investigative Service (DIS) as a cover when operating within the United States. In 1999, the DIS changed its name to the Defense Security Service, or DSS.

Of course, the scuttlebutt one hears from private detectives sometimes proves off-kilter, but in this case the suggestion makes sense. The Defense Security Service (DSS) is the agency of the Department of Defense charged with “clearing” individuals entrusted with sensitive military information. Many civilians undergo these background investigations, which are a routine fact of life for anyone who wants to work in an industry related in any way to defense. To establish a job applicant’s trustworthiness, DSS agents pry into credit histories and criminal records, and will even interview friends and family members. The goal: Weeding out individuals who show signs of instability or susceptibility to foreign influence.

One does not need much imagination to understand why the CIA would view DSS/DIS as an excellent domestic cover. If (presuming you are an American) someone showed up on your front step, flashed CIA credentials, and started asking intrusive questions about a friend’s personal habits, you might well become anxious or indignant; the scene could even end with a shouted reference to George Orwell and a slammed door. But if that same visitor showed DSS credentials, you would probably go out of your way to cooperate – after all, you would not want to ruin your friend’s career prospects.

The DSS web site lists the service’s field offices. In the state of New York, offices are located in Westbury, Syracuse, Liverpool, Rome, and Griffiss Air Force Base; no mention of any past or present office in New York City proper. News accounts of the disaster do not record either DSS or DIS as a tenant of any building in the trade center complex. Yet in the fall of 2001, the Southwest Bell SMARTpages online directory listed a phone number for the “US Defense Investigative Svc” at 7 World Trade Center.

Perhaps someone forgot to tell CIA about the name change.

An official told reporter Rizen that CIA personnel vacated these offices “soon after the hijacked planes hit the twin towers.” This version of events places the evacuation order after 9:06, the time of the second strike, even though most other building tenants left immediately after the first strike at 8:48. The account, if accurate, conjures up a grimly amusing image: Were the intelligence professionals the last people in the building to figure out that they were under terrorist attack?

The New York Times report raises the question of classified material falling into the wrong hands:
The recovery of secret documents and other records from the New York station should follow well-rehearsed procedures laid out by the agency after the Iranian takeover of the United States Embassy in Tehran in 1979. The revolutionaries took over the embassy so rapidly that the C.I.A. station was not able to effectively destroy all of its documents, and the Iranians were later able to piece together shredded agency reports. Since that disaster, the agency has emphasized rigorous training and drills among its employees on how to quickly and effectively destroy and dispose of important documents in emergencies.

As a result, a C.I.A. station today should be able to protect most of its secrets even in the middle of a catastrophic disaster like the Sept. 11 attacks, said one former agency official. "If it was well run, there shouldn't be too much paper around," the former official said.
The implication here is that CIA personnel destroyed scads of documents during that all-important 49 minute period between 9:06 and 9:55. One wonders why they would bother. Why not simply leave and lock the doors? After all, according to the official chronology, fire had not yet broken out within 7 WTC -- and even if smoke alarms were already ringing, no-one should have expected a building collapse. Nothing of the sort had ever happened before.

In all likelihood, un-shredded classified materials were left inside the building, and went down with the proverbial ship. A federal judge gave the CIA jurisdiction over the building 7 clean-up operations, no doubt to prevent sensitive documents from falling into the wrong hands – presuming that any such documents survived.

The fact that the CIA gained this jurisdiction bears upon a related matter: Remarkable caches of gold, drugs, and arms were stored beneath the WTC complex. Since much of this material rested beneath structures other than 7 World Trade Center, we shall deal with this issue in a separate chapter. (Some conspiratorialists will tell you that the existence of this underground trove somehow “proves” the intelligence community’s complicity in the attacks. This argument -- if it can even be called an argument – resists any attempt at logical analysis.)

* * *

Forgive an in medias res ending. One day, I really must finish that book. And now is the time for certain readers will do precisely what they were asked not to do; no doubt, they will take umbrage at my accusation of fanaticism while providing evidence of same. If you must, you must. Take it away, bomb-brigadiers...!




Search the archives for political-research at http://www.terazen.com/

Subscribe to the RSS feed for political-research at http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/rss




YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




No comments: