CIA TOLD NEW YORK TIMES ABOUT 9/11 WARNINGS

,              

                  COMMAND NEGLIGENCE: NY Times Lied           

         By Susan Lindauer, 9/11 Whistleblower  and Former U.S. Asset covering Iraq and Libya

   9/11 denialists like to swear smugly that the official 9/11 story must be true, because the government could never keep such an important secret without getting caught.

Somebody would spill the beans, right? In fact, a number of us tried. Media watchers should savvy up, as the air waves get blitzed this weekend with 9/11 emorials. If the corporate media had done its job as a watch dog, the world would have got an earful reliable intelligence sources debunking the official 9/11 story.

Unhappily, the corporate media has been a co-conspirator in the 9/11 Cover Up from day one. They have actively abetted the government with its dirty work. Say a truth teller got arrested on the Patriot Act—like me— and locked in prison on a military base, while the public debate raged over 9/11 and Iraq without access to knowledgeable sources. The government could rely on corporate media to squash the story, while the Justice Department fought my demands for a trial, playing every dirty trick in the book to stop a New York jury from hearing testimony about 9/11 and Iraq.

My nightmare is described in Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq. It was a frightening ordeal with secret charges, secret evidence, secret grand jury testimony, and threats of indefinite detention on a Texas military base.

However the Patriot Act by itself was not enough to silence facts about the command failure before 9/11 or Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence. Over and over, friends and colleagues reached out to the corporate media, delivering independent confirmations about my 9/11 warnings, the Iraqi peace framework and my work on the Lockerbie case, which proved my status as an Asset. Supporters pleaded for the media's help to expose the government's manipulations, so I could get my day in court, and bring that truth to the people.

Over and over again, the corporate media in New York itself mounted a wall of silence to buttress America's leaders.

Most New Yorkers and New Jersey residents would be appalled to discover that the worst media whore in the 9/11 Cover Up turned out to be the New York Times.

By May, 2004, the New York Times received no fewer than four confirmations of our Intelligence team's 9/11 warnings to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and the Office of Counter-Terrorism at the Justice Department. Confirmation was made six months before release of the 9/11 Commission report, when public discussion could have impacted the findings. Most importantly, a discourse of the facts about 9/11 would have educated voters before the November 2004 elections, holding leaders in Washington accountable to the people. For this reason, I offered to waive my Fifth Amendment rights under indictment, so the 9/11 Commission could take my testimony under oath.

Most critically, the New York Times gained two of those all important confirmations about the 9/11 warnings from  the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency. Both of my handlers, Dr. Richard Fuisz and Paul Hoven men freely volunteered our 9/11 warnings and the Iraqi Peace option to the New York Times. They also explained my work as a U.S. intelligence Asset engaged in the Lockerbie negotiations with Libya, and my role spearheading talks to resume weapons inspections with Iraqi Ambassador Dr. Saeed Hasan. The journalist, David Samuels, called me excitedly, after the interviews.

You read that correctly. The CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency both gave information about the 9/11 warnings to the New York Times, expecting the newspaper to alert its readers of the command negligence before the attack. The New York Times' readership was most personally impacted by the tragedy, after all. They made an effort to inspire discussion while the 9/11 Commission was hearing testimony.  The New York Times acquired two more confirmations of our 9/11 warnings from Dr. Parke Godfrey, a highly respected computer science professor of York University in Toronto, and my brother, John Lindauer of Los Angeles.

That took guts for the Intelligence Community. By this time, writing was on the wall that Republican Leaders would punish anyone who spoke against them.

One would expect the New York Times to rush to press with such a hot story. Think about it: a long-time U.S. Intelligence Asset, second cousin to President Bush's Chief of Staff, Andrew Card warns about 9/11 and has full knowledge of Iraq's cooperation with the 9/11 Investigation--- then gets arrested on the Patriot Act, after requesting to testify before Congress.

Wasn't that newsworthy?  Not according to the editors of the New York Times. Instead of objectively reporting independent confirmations of the 9/11 warnings and properly identifying me as an Asset, the New York Times engaged in gross public fraud. They abetted the government in concealing information of critical significance to the paper's home town. They manipulated the people of New York City into believing the CIA gave no advance warnings of 9/11 at all. While the American public screamed for impeachment, the New York Times blocked information that showed President Bush and Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez engaged in active public deception. The people were left believing the government had simply made mistakes before 9/11 and the Iraq War.

In other words, the New York Times acted like an old whore, clinging to GOP leaders like a last client, seeking assurances of her waning attractiveness to the public.

When one of Washington's most stellar attorneys, Brian Shaughnessy, forced the Court to grant my request for a single, pre-trial hearing—four years after my arrest— Parke Godfrey delivered shocking testimony about my 9/11 warnings less than a thousand feet from where the World Trade Center once graced the New York skyline.

Yet again, New York Times reporter, Alan Feuer, fraudulently and libelously invented a phony lead sentence: "She stuck her tongue out at the prosecutor."  And the New York Times parroted the Justice Department's line that "half a dozen psychiatrists" had declared me incompetent to stand trial—a blatant deception. Ignoring a morning's worth of testimony, Feuer suggested that I was a "religious maniac," something  hysterically funny to everyone who knows me. There's no reality contact in the one and only psychiatric report that postulated such claims. (That single evaluation was presented by the Justice Department's psychiatrist and tossed by the Bureau of Prisons in the first hour of my arrival at Carswell).

If the New York Times had scratched the surface in its reporting, journalists would have recognized the Justice Department was running what's called "a psy-op" designed to hide a major government deceptions from voters. A quick examination of the record would have revealed that half a dozen psychiatrists had challenged the Justice Department, and declared me fully competent in all areas of life. Even psychiatrists at Carswell Prison acknowledged I suffered "no evidence of hallucinations," "no depression." They said I socialized well, posed "zero behavioral problems." Weekly reports stated consistently that I was "cooperative, smiling, with good eye contact."

Notably, psychiatrists at Carswell Prison ruled out delusional disorder, citing first-hand observation, witness interviews, and diagnostic testing.

The slightest attention to witness testimonials would have exposed the whole public fraud. Yet the New York media carefully ignored evidentiary testimony that exposed the 9/11 warnings and denied symptoms of mental instability. While my attorney, Brian Shaughnessy protested for my right to a trial, the New York media assured the public that the Court finding was "gift wrapped for my defense."

Casting journalists as "controlled opposition--" might be overly generous given these circumstances, since it implies they have any backbone at all. Alas, most of them don't. They whine for pity for their low ratings. Then they let government officials write their news scripts in exchange for political access.

Hey, it's a tough job defending the official story of 9/11. You have to overcome janitorial crews, fire fighters and emergency rescue teams who all reported hearing explosions pop through the towers. They had to ignore damage to the front lobby— windows that exploded before the first plane hit the building.

You have to ignore what your own eyes see—a neat, clean controlled demolition of the Towers, which dropped free-fall into a pile of thermatic dust--- and fires that burned under the Towers until December, months after jet fuel would have gasped its last flame.

Airplanes crashed into the Towers that day, sure enough. However I can testify myself the U.S. had significant advance warnings about the airplane hijackings, back to April and May, 2001. The decision to go to War with Iraq, in the aftermath of the terrorist strike, was already made "at the highest levels of government above the CIA Director and Secretary of State."  I know that firsthand, because I was instructed to deliver that message, precisely worded, to Iraqi diplomats, and to demand "any fragment of actionable intelligence that would pinpoint the attack." And I did so.

Iraq had no intelligence. However, the CIA's advance knowledge of the conspiracy and advance threats against Iraq created powerful motivation and opportunity for a separate orphan team, domestic or foreign, to wire the Towers with military grade explosives.

The New York media never investigated reports that security cameras in the parking garage had photographed mysterious trucks/vans arriving at the World Trade Center at about 3 a.m and departing at 5 a.m, before Type AAA personalities arrived to start their days on Wall Street. The vans were different than the janitorial trucks, in make, model and decal. They arrived at the World Trade Center from August 23 to September 3.

Those are important missing pieces of how the 9/11 tragedy unfolded. Myself, I have concluded that airplane hijackings were used as a public cover for a controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7. From that point, it's up to explosives experts to determine the sorts materials applied to the detonation.

I won my freedom when the blogs and alternative radio took up my cause. In a practical sense, 9/11 marked the changing of the media guard. And it proved the internet boasts some fine journalists of its own, like Michael Collins and radio host Bob Tuskin at The Intel Hub.

No thanks to the government's top dogs at the New York Times. But perhaps that's not fair. A dog would have shown more loyalty to the people of Manhattan and New Jersey.

                                                     ##END###

9/11 Whistleblower, Susan Lindauer was a U.S. Intelligence Asset covering Iraq and Libya at the United Nations from 1995 to 2003. She is the author of Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq. Her five year indictment on the Patriot Act ended without a Trial five days before President Obama's inauguration.

THE MISSING SECURITY TAPES FROM THE WORLD TRADE CENTER

Listen to internet radio with Ernest Moore on Blog Talk Radio

By Susan Lindauer, former U.S. Asset and 9/11 Whistleblower

Late on the night of August 23, 2001, at about 3 a.m. security cameras in the parking garage of the World Trade Center captured the arrival of two or three truck vans.

Visual examination determined the vans were separate and unique from trucks used by janitorial services, including different colors and devoid of markings. More curious, all the janitorial trucks had pulled out of the Towers by about 2:30 a.m—about half an hour before the second set of vans arrived.

According to my high level State Department source with a top security clearance, who disclosed the unusual nightly activity, no vans matching that description had entered the World Trade Center at such an hour in any of the weeks or months prior to that date. It was a unique event.

Security cameras caught the vans leaving the Towers at approximately 5 a.m—before the first wave of AAA personality types on Wall Street, driving Mercedes and BMWs, arrived to track the markets.

For the next 10 to 12 nights, the same mysterious truck vans arrived at the World Trade Center at the same mysterious hour--- after the janitorial crews had left the building and before the most fanatic robber barons on Wall Street showed up for work. The vans appeared at the World Trade Center from approximately August 23, 2001 until September 3 or 4, 2001. After that last night, they never appeared at the Towers again.

The vans were never heard of again, either. The 9/11 Commission was never informed of their surprising presence in the Towers three weeks before the 9/11 attack. Most of the 9/11 Truth Community has no knowledge of this extraordinary nightly activity, either.

For all the public's ignorance, video from the security cameras could be the most significant missing part of the 9/11 puzzle. This State Department source was convinced the mysterious trucks were used to transport explosives into the building, and that an unidentified orphan team wired the World Trade Center for a controlled demolition in those late night hours. He has stayed quiet to protect his job, his retirement pension and his reputation—knowing that others who spoke up have gotten fired or thrown in prison (myself included).

Controlled Demolition

Other evidence supports a controlled demolition of the Towers, as a supplement to the hijackings. Firefighters and maintenance crews reported hearing explosions popping through the Towers on 9/11. And previous reports indicate that dust from the World Trade Center tested positive for "thermate explosives--" a derivative of a thermite bomb.

A thermite reaction involves a mixture of iron oxide and aluminum, while thermate adds an element of sulfur. When the iron oxide-aluminum mixture is ignited, a super vigorous reaction occurs, creating molten metal—and dust, in the case of thermate. The reaction is extremely exothermic, meaning that a great deal of heat is given off, making for an incredibly powerful reducing agent.

Even so, as the 10 year anniversary of the 9/11 attack approaches, the majority of Americans continue to be confused as to how a controlled demolition scenario fits with the airplane hijackings and aerial strike on the World Trade Center—which the whole world witnessed on play back over and over in the media, until the image was seared like a brand on our collective consciousness.

Until now, there has been a false dichotomy that only one or the other style of attack could have occurred, but never both together. Some parts of the 9/11 Community itself vigorously dispute that both could have occurred as synchronized events. And most of the corporate media refuses to acknowledge the controlled demolition theory whatsoever.

When the public understands 9/11 as a series of Real Time events throughout the month of August, 2001, the unfolding sequence of this tragedy makes a lot more sense.

The difficulty is throwing out everything the public has been taught about 9/11—created for the convenience of politicians and corporate media, who simplified the story for public consumption.

First and foremost, contrary to all media reports and official claims, U.S. and foreign intelligence absolutely expected the 9/11 attack to occur--- citing airplane hijackings and a strike on the World Trade Center. Even the time frame was identified precisely—known to be late August through mid-September.

I relate here my own experience as evidence. It has been corroborated in courtroom testimony by Parke Godfrey, a computer science professor at York University in Toronto. He delivered his statement under oath in the Federal Courthouse of the Southern District of New York—1000 yards from where the World Trade Center once graced the skyline.

On August 2, the date of Robert Mueller's Senate confirmation hearings to become Director of the FBI, my CIA handler, Dr. Richard Fuisz warned me not to travel to New York because the attack on the World Trade Center involving airplane hijackings was "considered imminent," with the potential for "mass human casualties" and a "possible miniature thermo-nuclear device" (thermite).

Our team aggressively tried to block the conspiracy. But not everyone was on board.

Threats to Iraq

As far back as April and May of 2001, a decision had been made at the top levels of the government that War with Iraq would be in play in the aftermath of a 9/11 scenario.

As the primary Asset covering the Iraqi Embassy in New York, I myself was ordered to threaten Iraqi diplomats with War, if it was determined that Iraq possessed actionable intelligence about the airplane hijacking conspiracy and failed to hand it over through my back channel.

After initially balking at the message, I was informed the threat originated at the highest level of government, above the CIA Director and Secretary of State. That could only be President George Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

Iraqi diplomats threw up their hands: They had nothing to give us, they said. But go ahead, they told me. "Send your FBI. They are welcome in Baghdad. We want peace with America. And maybe they will find something." For all the brouhaha after 9/11, the fact remains that George Bush took no action on Iraq's invite.

There was chatter about the 9/11 conspiracy throughout the Intelligence Community all summer long. The greatest part of the Intelligence Community abhorred the scenario. My own Intelligence team, triangulating the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency pushed and pushed for actionable intelligence from Baghdad. However, though we could not understand what the hell was going on, our efforts kept running into a wall of interference from the Justice Department, with only superficial outward support.

For the integrity of history, Americans and the world community have a fundamental right to understand what actions the Intelligence Community did undertake prior to the attack—because it exposes the high level opposition running interference.

August Timeline

·       On Thursday, August 2, 2001--- my CIA handler, Dr. Richard Fuisz and I discussed over the telephone our belief that the attack would be imminent.

·       On Saturday, August 4-- I visited the Iraqi Embassy in New York for the final time before 9/11, pushing for any fragment of actionable intelligence from Baghdad that could pinpoint the conspiracy.

On the weekend of August 4-5—spooky NSA types "visited" the office where I had a part time consulting job. Of course the office was closed for the weekend, and I won't speculate how they got inside. However, while snooping, they took a "proof of life," for want of a better expression. It is a physical copy of the Wall Street Journal dated July 30, 2001—the same week as my conversation with Dr. Fuisz— addressed to the company, with the street address and name of the man I had been working for.

The copy of the July 30, 2001 Wall Street Journal surfaced on my desk at home—Nine Years after the attack— while I was traveling in Japan on a speaking tour for the advance release of my book, "Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq," which features a detailed analysis of our team's 9/11 warnings, the 9/11 investigation and a comprehensive peace framework developed with Iraqi diplomats. Given the upheaval in my life throughout the intervening decade—including a year's stint in prison on a Texas military base, while the government covered up my team's 9/11 warnings and the true facts of Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence— there's no way a copy of the Wall Street Journal could have survived as desk clutter.

Other Intelligence officers will recognize the significance at once. That hard copy of the Wall Street Journal proves beyond any question that other spooks were tracking our team's conversations about the conspiracy in "real time" fully 6 weeks before 9/11 occurred. A newspaper would have been thrown out of an office weeks before the attack. Somebody had to grab it up almost immediately after my conversation with Dr. Fuisz.

See? Other teams tried to put together the attack scenario, too.

All of it points to the frenetic activity in advance of 9/11. There was a lot of action behind the scenes. And Intelligence folk are anything but passive individuals. Quite the opposite, there's a lot of creative risk-taking and proactive problem solving. None of these people sit on their hands.

Americans still don't know that:

·       On Monday, August 6, I met with Dr. Fuisz and we hammered out a plan of action for alerting the White House that this hijacking conspiracy should move to "emergency status."

·       That same Monday, August 6, the CIA handed President Bush a memo warning about an expected terrorist conspiracy involving Al Qaeda. Though I could be mistaken, I have always believed Dr. Fuisz contributed to that report. If not, it proves again that a broad spectrum of U.S. intelligence was moving to high alert status, far enough in advance to block the attack.

·       Following instructions from Dr. Fuisz, on Tuesday, August 7 or Wednesday, August 8, I placed an emergency call to the private staff of Attorney General John Ashcroft. Identifying myself as the Chief U.S. Intelligence Asset covering Iraq and Libya at the United Nations, I delivered our warning about a conspiracy involving airplane hijackings and a targeted strike on the World Trade Center.

I requested an emergency broadcast alert through all Federal Agencies seeking any fragment of intelligence involving airplane hijackings and a strike on the World Trade Center. I warned the attack was "imminent" with expectations of "mass casualties," and that it should be regarded as Emergency Status.

·       Attorney General John Ashcroft's private staff immediately gave me a telephone number at the Office of Counter-Terrorism, and told me to repeat what I had just told them to the person at that number. Immediately I complied.

·       Later that week on August 9 or 10, I drove over to the Arlington, Virginia home of my second cousin, Andrew Card--- Chief of Staff to President George Bush— ready to deliver the same message. I waited two hours in my car outside of his home. Occasionally neighbors peeked outside their curtains, while I chain smoked cigarettes in the hot car. (Yes, I have quit smoking.) Driving away, I remember thinking that I might be making the greatest mistake of my life.

My Own Private Hell during the Cover Up

I am extremely proud of our team efforts before 9/11 and throughout the 9/11 investigation. For all that, Americans are learning about this very late because I got into great big, bad trouble with the Feds when I tried to talk. I suffered five (5) years of indictment on the Patriot Act and one year of prison on a military base without a trial, when Republicans decided to reinvent the facts about 9/11 and Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence, denying Iraq's contributions to the 9/11 investigation and the existence of a comprehensive peace framework.

Our relationship soured as I became convinced Republicans at the top echelons allowed 9/11 to happen, killing thousands of innocent Americans and international citizens, so they could build a phony case for War against Iraq and Afghanistan.

I was outraged that the American government has done this to itself—as a pretext for military aggression and massive deficit spending in support of the military industrial complex, which is bankrupting the Middle Class. And I was quite vocal in expressing my belief that Americans have a right to full disclosure about our activities before 9/11 and the Iraqi War. And the devil take politicians!

Without question I posed a grave threat to political grandstanding on 9/11 and the myth of Washington's "outstanding leadership performance on terrorism." Many times I have thought of myself as Dorothy in the Land of Oz pulling back the curtain on the Wizard, and exposing his deceit before the hapless, trusting Munchkins.

In truth, the spooks did a great job before 9/11. Everything moved with lightning speed ahead of the threat. We could have stopped 9/11 easily if the Justice Department had fulfilled requests for inter-agency cooperation. There was plenty of time to alert NORAD or post an anti-air craft battery on top of the World Trade Center buildings.

That's why the GOP leadership had to take me out—because I refused to back off that point. If I had been free, the American people and the world community would have learned the truth much sooner.

Controlled Demolition

Unhappily for all of us, because of private conversations with sources like my State Department colleague, I have reached additional conclusions that our team was not the only one at work before 9/11.

Though none of us expected this to happen, I have come to believe that our efforts collided with a force of equal resistance, in the form of an orphan team also watching the events unfolding like us.

As a long-time participant in multiple terrorism investigations, I have personal knowledge that most terrorist attacks are noisy, smoky and chaotic--- without achieving maximum destruction of the target. The 1993 World Trade Center attack by Ramzi Youseff and Sheikh Abdul Rahmon of Egypt killed 5 people. The bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in the Port of Aden, Yemen killed 12 people. Without extra push, this 9/11 attack would never have killed so many people either—100 people at the very most.

Add to that a recipe of incompetent pilots--- who functioned as Intelligence Assets themselves in a few cases--- Again from personal experience, I know that Assets are heavily scrutinized at all times by handlers from multiple agencies. I am convinced that an inner circle anticipated the event, and saw that their boys flying those planes could not achieve maximum damage sufficient to achieve their War agenda in Iraq.

I cannot blame Americans for feeling overwhelmed, even heart-broken by these revelations. But bottom line jet fuel fires could not have collapsed both of those Towers, or Building 7, pretty much evaporating the entire steel frame of the buildings into dust and molten steel. Add to that the CIA's urgent reports that a miniature thermo-nuclear device would be used in the attack---and that's why I had to stay out of New York City.

The strange nightly activity at the World Trade Center three weeks before the attack clinched it for me. I am 100 percent convinced those Towers were wired for explosives.

Yes, hijacked airplanes struck the towers. But bringing down the Towers to secure War with Iraq required some extra umph.

I cannot speculate who wired the towers with explosives. I could make a guess, but my training as an Asset requires me to stay focused on what I have observed first-hand, and to recognize my own limitations.

So why should the world care? At this point, it is most critical for Americans to stop politicians in Washington from using 9/11 for grandstanding and personal ambitions. The War on Terrorism has perpetrated a fraud on all of us. Those who support the War on Terror are destroying our fiscal economy and our Middle Class.

That's why Americans must learn the truth about 9/11. It's reached a crisis point where we must get off this merry-go-round of defense spending. We must end the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Otherwise this fraud of 9/11 is going to ruin our great country for all time.

I only hope it isn't too late already.

#####

This article may be republished in whole or part with attribution to the author.

Susan Lindauer is the author of "Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq."

CONSERVATOR & GUARDIAN COURT CORRUPTION

What do we do when the courts do not protect Seniors and their estates?