Archive for the ‘–’ Category


The New Yorker details a lengthy collection of facts about the 9/11 plot and the hijackers, only to spin them away with this:

“What was needed was cooperation with other federal agencies, but for reasons both petty and obscure those agencies chose to hide vital clues from the investigators most likely to avert the attacks.”

Petty?  So now we’re handing excuses to the CIA to cover its high treason?  This is the standard media fallback position when this issue is breached.  The FBI vs. CIA “petty infighting” myth is what the problem is, according to corporate spinmeisters.  Petty infighting isn’t criminal, apparently, and so no harm no foul.  It is inconceivable that deliberate agency, conscious decisions could have factored into letting the 9/11 attacks succeed.  Despite the overwhelming abundance of evidence suggesting that conscious decisions were made to let the attacks proceed, this cannot be printed in corporate mainstream journals.

The Al Qaeda Switchboard

This convenient “petty” excuse, like covering up alleged “embarrassment” serves to gloss over the entire post-9/11 cover-up and protection of the Saudi regime (and others).  American pseudo-intellectuals lap up this piss.

The phrase also completely ignores the obstruction of FBI field agents by their own headquarters, specifically Coleen Rowley’s case.


As people are reading this old post again, how many of you know that “fifty” CIA personnel knew that the hijackers were in the country prior to the attacks? How many of you know the source and why we know this?

It isn’t broadcast on mainstream corporate junk news.