World Records that Guinness Never Mentioned

     Everyone is interested in hearing about world records, but we all know that most world records will someday be excelled. Someone will run faster or jump higher than the previous record holder.

     One category of record, though, will always stand. The event that’s the first of its kind will always be the first. We know, for example, that Charles Lindberg will always be the first person to fly a heavier-than-air craft non-stop from one continental mainland to another.

September 11, 2001, is a treasure trove of firsts. Given the immortality of “firsts,” it puzzles me that the Guinness Book of World Records has ignored all but a few of them. Please allow me to supply the deficit.

     Hani Hanjour was the first uncertified pilot in history to teach himself how to fly a large commercial passenger jet. Theretofore, it was believed that only a skilled pilot could be trained on a flight simulator, and then only under skilled supervision. Hanjour and the other three 9/11 hijackers were the only rank amateurs in aviation history to accomplish this feat with or without assistance.

     The South Tower of the World Trade Center was the first skyscraper in the 100-year history of steel-reinforced skyscrapers to collapse as a result of fire damage. A few minutes later, the North Tower of the World Trade Center became the second. It hadn’t happened before that day, nor has it happened since then.

     World Trade Center Building No. 7 was the first skyscraper in history to collapse for no apparent reason. Officially, it collapsed straight down because some concrete and glass had fallen on it seven hours earlier. Still unexplained is how a building with 40 tons of steel reinforcement wasn’t strong enough to withstand a few tons of pulverized concrete and glass.

     Hani Hanjour was the only pilot in the history of aviation to fly a broad-winged aircraft at near ground level (no more than 20 feet above the ground) for more than a mile at more than 500 miles per hour. Every other airplane in history flying at that speed and altitude has lost stability, rolled, and crashed after only a few hundred yards.

     September 11, 2001, was the first time in commercial aviation history that as many as nineteen hijackers boarded a commercial airliner without any of their names being recorded on flight manifests. We are told that the reason for the absence of Arabic names on all four flight manifests was due to the hijackers using fake ID’s with European-sounding names.

     Especially puzzling is that, at all three airports from which the four flights originated, security was in the hands of Israeli-owned security companies. The Israelis are said to be the world’s most experienced anti-terrorists. So why weren’t their trained personnel suspicious of nineteen Arabs who claimed to be white? That’s probably another world record that Guinness failed to mention.

     Three of the four airliners that were hijacked that day were the only commercial airliners in history to crash without leaving significant debris. CNN reporter Jaime Mcintyre said on camera that it didn’t look as though a plane had crashed “anywhere near” the Pentagon. (Click here.) 

     A Fox news reporter said that he’d seen no indication that a plane had crashed at the Shanksville, Pennsylvania, crash site. There’s a simple explanation for that one: United Airlines Flight 93 was the only airplane in history to crash at one site and leave its debris somewhere else. The debris from Flight 93 was scattered all over a four-mile radius in the woods several hundred yards beyond the crash site. (Click here.) 

     The three planes (other than Flight 93) in question were the only commercial airliners in history to almost completely vaporize as a result of the combustion of fuel (kerosene) in their tanks.

     The nearly complete vaporization of the plane that hit the North Tower is another puzzle. Anyone who has seen the videos of the crash saw the plane crash into the building and come out the other side. Officially, the building collapsed because of the burning kerosene that the plane had left in the building. If that’s true, then the plane was the first and only commercial airliner to vaporize for no apparent reason. (Click here.) 

     A few bits and pieces were recovered from the crash sites—all of them small enough for one person to carry in his hand. For over a half century, every time a plane crashed in America, the pieces were collected so that aviation officials could learn what they could from it, even if they already thought they knew what had caused the crash. In the entire history of this policy, all four hijacked planes were the only exceptions to this longstanding requirement.

     World Trade Center Building No. 7 was the only case in history in which the accidental collapse of a skyscraper was announced on live television even before it had collapsed. More than twenty minutes before WTC7 collapsed, a BBC reporter announced that it had collapsed. The entire time that she spoke, viewers could clearly see WTC7 still standing behind her. Five minutes before WTC7 collapsed, BBC conveniently lost live-feed transmission. (Click here.)

     Gene Corley and Mark Loizeaux deserve special mention in this article. Corley was the FEMA investigator in both the Alfred P. Murrah Building (in Oklahoma City, 1995) and the WTC cases. In 1995, he became the only investigator in the history of forensic crime investigation to allow the scene of a major homicide to be destroyed before forensic evidence could be gathered. In 2001, he did it again with the ruins of the World Trade Center. Loizeaux was responsible for “recycling materials” (a.k.a. “destroying evidence”) from both crime scenes. (Click here.)

     Thus, the crime scenes of the largest and second largest mass murders in the history of the United States were not investigated.

     There are probably many more world records related to 9/11, but I’ll mention one more: the 9/11 Commission investigation. The amount of money allotted for the investigation of 9/11 was the smallest amount spent on a major congressional investigation since the period before the Pearl Harbor inquiry.

     A single comparison is particularly telling. Congress spent $100 million investigating the Monica Lewinski scandal in 1998. The 9/11 Commission was allotted $14 million. The original amount had been $4 million, but it was increased due to public outcry. Before that, the Bush Administration had spent more than a year resisting any investigation at all. Then Vice President Dick Cheney said that and investigation of 9/11 would undermine the administration’s efforts to prevent another 9/11.

     Public outcry was the only reason that Washington made even the pretense of investigating 9/11. What could the public accomplish if we really got serious about the mess in New York, Tel Aviv, and Washington?
Other September 11, 2001, articles in this blog

Suspicious Timing: More evidence of Israeli prior knowledge and planning of 9/11

     The Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) is an international organization that was organized to “support the war on terror.”  Its founders are some of the great movers and shakers in American and Israeli political circles.

     As an amateur historian, I’m obsessed with time lines. The war on terror was declared after September 11, 2001. The FDD was officially launched on September 13, 2001. How were they able to organize eleven heavy hitters and be ready to fulfill its grandiose purpose in less than two days?

     To answer that question, it’s necessary to go back four years to the formation of a nominally American organization—a much better-known organization which would later contribute leadership to the FDD.  It was founded in 1997, and it was called the Project for the New American Century.

     You probably remember them. Many of their founders, such as William Kristol, hold dual citizenship in the United States and Israel. They’re the guys who drew up a wish list in which they confessed that their wishes wouldn’t be granted unless the United States were struck by a “new Pearl Harbor” that would frighten the American people into acceding to the wishes of Kristol and his pals.

     I call it a wish list because any alternative label would be unacceptable to readers who are addicted to comfort. The alternative would be to call it a plan.

    Maybe you’ve heard the term opportunity cost. That’s the difference between what you gained from a given course of action and the greater gain you could have derived from doing something else.

     The highly influential people involved in the PNAC invested hundreds of thousands of man hours, tens of millions of dollars, and all that effort on an endeavor that they never expected to gain them anything—unless the United States experienced a new Pearl Harbor with characteristics that perfectly dovetailed with PNAC’s blueprint for the New World Order. Unless there was a close fit between PNAC’s blueprint and a made-to-order, new Pearl Harbor, the opportunity costs for each one of the participants would have been astronomical.

     Let’s move up to the spring of 2001.

     Sourcewatch cites The American Conservative as saying that the FDD was an outgrowth of the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET). EMET is an anti-Palestinian hate group founded  in the spring of 2001, and which foundered shortly thereafter. (Here)  Israel needed a more palatable means of presenting its ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in Gaza. (Here)

     Over the next few months, Israeli spinmeisters and Israeli/American dual-citizenship neoconservatives threw this and that into their witches brew. By late August, their organizational work on the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies was completed.

     Of the eleven men and women who were FDD’s founding leadership, five of them had been signers of the Project for the New American Century. They were Clifford D. May, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Bill Kristol, and James Woolsey. Although Newt Gingrich had not been present for the signing of PNAC, he was yet another founding leader of the FDD. Other leadership positions in both PNAC and the FDD were held by Gary Bauer, Charles Krauthammer, Richard Perle, William Bennet, Rich Lowry, and Jeanne Kirkpatrick.

     It had been more than four years since these neocons had filled out their wish list, predicated entirely on a new Pearl Harbor that perfectly dovetailed with their blueprint. Now all they could do is sit back and wait for it to happen.

     At 11:30 P.M. on the night of September 11, 2001, President Bush wrote in his diary that the United States had been hit by “a twenty-first century Pearl Harbor.” Yes, that’s right: He used the same reference that PNAC had placed on its wish list four years earlier.

     Less than two days later, at least five signers of PNAC, now representing an Israeli propaganda organ, announced their intention to help the United States fight its “war on terror.”

     On September 20, 2001, President Bush would address the United States Congress in what would become known as his “War on Terror Speech.” You read it correctly. Bush’s “War on Terror Speech” was seven days after the FDD was launched to “support the war on terror.” The same people had used the term “Pearl Harbor” in the context of 9/11 more than four years earlier than Bush did. (Here)

     Granted, the war-on-terror rationale for launching FDD may have been a later add-on, but that would suggest that Israel and their dual-citizenship stooges had other reasons for launching the FDD. Thus, the rejection of one conspiracy theory would, itself, be a conspiracy theory. Either way, it leaves open some tricky questions such as, “If helping the United States fight the War on Terror wasn’t the real reason for starting the FDD, what was the real reason?”

     You could keep going around in circles with questions like that. It’s like the classic time-travel paradox.

     There is, however, one simple explanation for all of these mysteries—one that isn’t riddled with paradoxes. Both PNAC and the FDD were founded by people who knew that the terrorist attacks of 9/11 would happen. Both groups, as well as fractional lenders, the military-industrial complex, the disaster capitalists, and other Insiders, greatly benefited from 9/11.

     In the first article in this series of “motive, means, and opportunity,” I pointed out several ways that Israeli leaders benefited from 9/11 and even said that it was “a good thing for Israel.” (Here) In the second article of the series, I proved that Muslim “terrorists” did not have the means to have carried it out, although Israel, with the help of American Insiders, did.  (Here) In both articles, I offered abundant proof that the Israeli regime had prior knowledge of 9/11.

     In this article, I proved that the events of 9/11 perfectly dovetailed with plans that Israelis and Israeli dual-citizens had made years in advance of 9/11.  The odds against coincidence are astronomical.

     In the final article in this series, I’ll show how Israeli software and security companies—and no companies other than Israeli companies—had the opportunity to carry out 9/11.

Other September 11, 2001, articles in this blog

September 11's Lucky Winners

[All of the articles I've seen on the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, have focused on certain anomalies concerning the events. From there the writers have examined all areas of these anomalies. I'm trying something different: a deconstructive approach to investigating the events now collectively called 9/11. In this article, the first of a four-part series, I'm examining motive. In part two, still focusing on motive, I'll examine an organization I've never seen mentioned in any 9/11 literature. Part three deals with means; that is, I'll describe certain things about how the attacks were carried out. I have found that the most effective means of discovering internal problems with a story is simply to retell the story as it has been "officially" told to us. Due to certain technical discoveries that have been made since the story was first presented to the American people, this version of the narrative will be more Clancied than you may be accustomed to hearing. Finally, in part four, I'll explore the area of opportunity. Who had the ability to make sure that certain things (the means) would take place the way they did? Motive, means and opportunity—these are the three requirements that mark the difference between evidence and proof.]

Until I began researching the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, I had always thought that the luck enjoyed by Timothy Dexter (1748-1806) was unique in American history. Oh, you’ve never heard of Timothy Dexter?
Timothy Dexter was an illiterate, dimwitted businessman who always had astounding success with the most unlikely business ventures. He bought up all the Continental money he could, although it was considered worthless. When Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton chose to back the currency at full value, this measure made Dexter wealthy.
Dexter grew even wealthier by exporting mittens and bed warmers to the West Indies; shipping coal to the coal mining town of Newcastle, England; and sending Bibles and stray cats to the Caribbean Islands, among other unlikely ventures. (See Dexter’s bio here.)
More recently, Larry Silverstein, the last owner of the World Trade Center, was even luckier than Timothy Dexter. Unlike Dexter, Larry Silverstein wasn’t considered the village idiot. He was, in fact, a friend of Benjamin Netanyahu, who reportedly telephoned Silverstein at least once a week.
When Larry Silverstein bought the World Trade Center (WTC) for $125 million in July 2001, he bought a white elephant. WTC’s low occupancy rate was enough to make it a major money-losing investment. Still worse, Silverstein would be saddled with having to remove all the WTC’s asbestos at a cost of about $1 billion. (Click here.)
Silverstein also took out an insurance policy guaranteeing him $3.5 billion in the event that the World Trade Center suffered a terrorist attack. The policy carried a double indemnity in case the World Trade Center was attacked twice. Now, what are the odds of that happening?
As the insurers and Silverstein disagreed over whether 9 11 was one attack or two, they split the difference, and Silverstein pocketed $4.5 billion. Thus, instead of suffering a guaranteed $1 billion loss, Silverstein’s investment in the World Trade Center made a 3,500% profit in less than two months. Timothy Dexter never got that lucky.
Silverstein’s luck went beyond money. He and his two offspring worked at the World Trade Center. Silverstein himself ate breakfast on the top floor of the building every weekday morning without fail. On the morning of September 11, 2001, all three men were somewhere else. (Click here.)
There were other lucky winners that day. Among them were 4,000 Israelis believed to have been in or around the World Trade Center the day the towers fell. Many American Jews were killed that day, but only 5 out of 4,000 Israelis died.
Odigo, an Israeli-owned electronic instant messenger service, admitted that two of its employees (both Israelis then in Israel) had received non-specific warnings that a major terrorist attack was about to take place. This was two hours before the first plane hit the World Trade Center. This warning came some 84 minutes before the Federal Aviation Administration knew about the hijacking. [American Action Note: The non-specific nature of the warning indicates second- or third-hand information. It was, nonetheless, an indication that some kind of warning was going out to Israelis, and that the original source had more specific advance knowledge.] (Click here.)
Goldman Sachs was another lucky winner that day. On September 10, their Tokyo office warned its employees to steer clear of the American buildings. Would this information have been transmitted to the New York office, or did it come from the New York office? (Click here.)
Zim Integrated Shipping Services, which was 49% Israeli owned, had its offices on the 47th floor of the WTC North Tower, leased until the end of 2001. Only a week before the attack, they broke the lease and vacated the building. This move cost them $50,000. As it was with Larry Silverstein, what looked like bad business turned out to be a lucky move. The first plane to hit the World Trade Center struck the 47th floor of the North Tower, dead center. (Click here.)
Clearforest, the sole Israeli company remaining in the building had 19 employees, 16 of whom were somewhere else that day. The remaining 5 employees safely evacuated the building.

The men known as the five dancing Israelis (Click here.) made a very lucky guess that day.
I wish I could take lucky guessers like them horse races. They managed to have videotaping equipment already set up before the first plane hit the World Trade Center. When they were spotted laughing, dancing, and giving one another high fives, they were mistaken for Arabs. The van they’d used belonged to Urban Moving Systems, a front for the Israeli Mossad. When interviewed on an Israeli television program, one of the men said that they “were there to document the event.” What event? At the time they’d set up their equipment, the event had not yet happened. Was that a lucky guess or what? (Click here.)
Probably the luckiest winners of the day were the top officials in the Israeli regime. Haaretz, a moderate Israeli newspaper which is said to be read by Israel’s top leaders, carried an article reporting that Benjamin Netanyahu openly boasted that the mass murder on September 11 was “very good for Israel.” Netanyahu crowed, "We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq." He silkily purred that the mass murder of 3,000 Americans “has swung public opinion in our favor.” The New York Times also reported this news story. (Click here.)
At the time of the attacks, then former Prime Minister Ehud Barak was in London. Barak was astonishingly lucky that day. Only a few minutes after the first plane hit the World Trade Center—four hours before news sources confirmed that investigators were working under the assumption that the events were “part of a terrorist attack”—five hours before Osama bin Laden was named as a suspect, Ehud Barak just happened to appear in the BBC newsroom in London. An hour later, while two of the hijacked planes were still in the air, Ehud Barak, obviously well prepared, gave an interview in which he gave “information” that President Bush wouldn’t know until nine o’clock that night. Was he a really lucky guesser or what? (Click here.)
If you think Ehud Barak was a lucky guesser, Robert J. Loewenberg will really blow you away. He was in Israel at the time of the attacks; that's seven hours ahead of New York time. He managed to produce a well-researched, painstakingly written article about the attacks within hours of their occurrence. Most of the information in the article was unknown to American intelligence agencies until (going by Israeli time) the next morning.
     Here is the time line as I wrote it in my comments (Click here.) to the Vatic Project:
"A key word in the article is today's, but left unsaid was the time of day. The author of that article, Robert Loewenberg, is a dual citizen of the U.S. and Israel. Israel, where his bio says he now lives, is in an earlier time zone.
"When the first plane hit the World Trade Center, it was 3:45 P.M. in Israel. Israel evacuated its embassies at 5:54 P.M. Israel time. At 9:00 P.M. Israeli time, an FBI spokesman told CNN that they were "working on the assumption" that the crashes were part of a terrorist attack. At 11:00 P.M. Israeli time, Osama bin Laden was named as a suspect, based on "new and specific information." Earlier suggestions that Muslims or Arabs were involved in the attacks had been reported as "unconfirmed." At 3:30 A.M. September 12 Israeli time, Bush addressed the nation but doesn't identify the attackers. As he speaks, member of Congress tell CNN during "private briefings" that there's "enough evidence" to convince them that Osama bin Laden was behind the attacks. At 6:30 A.M. September 12 Israeli time, Bush wrote in his journal 'The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today....We THINK it's Osama bin Laden.' (emphasis added)
Loewenberg's article was obviously well prepared; it had to have taken hours to write. Given the time line, those were hours he didn't have. Prior knowledge? You bet."

Of course, I’m not suggesting that Israel did 9 11. No, our government leaders tell us that Israel’s enemies did it; and of course our government leaders wouldn’t lie to us, now would they? And isn’t it ironic that the big losers from the September 11 terrorist attacks are the very people who are officially blamed for the attacks and who, as a result, have suffered more than anyone else? Or is irony the proper word for it?
Other September 11, 2001, articles in this blog