A lot of cherry-picking was done to arrive at this.

If this title was designed to bring people in then leads them to a different conclusion then it is a good thing.
If the author stops short, then he has done a disservice to all of us. I MEAN ALL OF US.

Outside of the incisively relevant comments and observations from Aidan Monaghan (which cast major doubts as to the *first hand* involvement of "Muslim hijackers") the "LIHOP" type of premise assumed by this book does not render any involved officials within the US (government/military) any less guilty than if they had planned and executed it *without* " Muslim hijackers" playing a part.

If a criminal case was presented in a real US court of law, with various US officials charged with "accessory before (and after) the fact" to mass murder (etc), the charges and possible penalties would be as serious as those potentially faced by the actual perpetrators.

A genuine trial along the lines of the "LIHOP" scenario would allow for the subpœna'ing and cross examination of witnesses, and as a result, the innocence or guilt of the alleged "Muslim hijackers" would very likely be established. Of course, a judge can only accept real evidence to be entered into the hearing, and as Aidan Monaghan stated, pretty much everything we have been told re. "Muslim hijackers" has little of no substance.. ie single sourced, hearsay, arrived at by unbelievable fantasy (such as the indestructible passport), and even outright lies.

Then, on top of all that, we have numerous elements of the 9/11 attacks which the "19 Muslim hijackers", or even their alleged paymasters, could never have organized, for example: The deliberate multi-count obstruction of military intervention that morning by Col. Marr, as recounted in the German video posted above, the deliberate alteration of the NORAD scramble-intercept protocol prior to 9/11 itself, the organizing of numerous war games, drills and exercises at the exact time frame coinciding with the attacks, and the wholesale tampering of 3 crime scenes and massive destruction/removal of vital evidence... amongst numerous others. The overwhelming evidence that explosives (of a very specific nature, only accessible to people of privileged positions in the defense sector) brought down WTC1, 2 and 7..... is the thick layer of icing on a very large cake.

This book is valuable in that it represents an avenue towards 9/11 Truth for those whose comfort zones (amongst other factors) dictate that Islamic people MUST have played a part... and that is likely be a very considerable segment of the (US) population.

Anyone have comments on this story which may be semi related to this thread:

http://www.iran911case.com/

also this other article possbibly related to this thread:

http://back-spin.blogspot.com/2011/07/fishing-for-truth.html

the second arttice is interesting especially; it has developed more since it's original posting but was originally semi-focused on this claim made in a 9/11 lawsuit:

According to court papers filed yesterday, the lawyers "believe that FBI reports and records show that a call was placed from Julie Ashley's cellphone to hijacker Mohamed Atta's cellphone on or about Sept. 11, 2001."

The court papers also reveal that Ashley's husband, Iranian-born pilot Ahmad Farid Khorrami, was jailed for three months right after the attacks on suspicion of links to some of the Sept. 11 hijackers

Those statements are found in this original article if you don't like the link above:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/suit_eyes_call_to_atta_wdA97IIHvkkDuCf8PQko7O

There are many layers to this onion we are opening.

I just found all this stuff because I was reading into this recent story:

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/view.bg?articleid=1349242

Your comment

"If we had five more books like this which focus only on factual, provable, tangible evidence, we would be much farther along. Instead, a whole group of theorists here would rather read a fantastic imaginary story which sweetens up its allure with theories that said theorists "KNOW" what happened. How audacious an assertion. You don't KNOW what happened. I KNOW you asserting you do hurts the victims’ families of the attacks who are truly skeptical for provable real justice!"

Well you have at least one other book already on this same subject, “Prior Knowledge of 9/11” and I will bet many more in the next few months. Several authors have called me to get some additional information I have in “Prior Knowledge” to add to their books. “Prior Knowledge of 9/11” was first released in January 2007, and it has been up dated several times, just before September 11, in 2008, 2009 and 2010 so it would have the very latest information.

I am sure Kevin’s book says the pretty much the same thing, although if Kevin’s book is based on the HisoryCommons time line it may have a number of mistakes in the information, that would make seeing the whole conspiracy of 9/11 more difficult.

It was finding accurate information that in effect corrected those mistakes that essentially unraveled the entire criminal conspiracy that had allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place.

Just to mention a few;

Fahad al-Quso was never at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting and was never in any Kuala Lumpur photograph.

Wilshire at no time ever acted alone or by himself, he always acted under orders from Richard Blee, orders which came from Cofer Black and George Tenet.

And Sherry Sabol’s account of the meeting between her and FBI IOS Agent Dina Corsi on August 28, 2001 is the correct account of what had taken place at the meeting between these two.

Finally it was not Dina Corsi who asked at the June 11, 2001 meeting between the FBI criminal investigators on the Cole bombing, the CIA and FBI HQ Agent Dina Corsi, “ Do you recognize Fahad al-Quso in these photos”, but CIA officer Clark Shannon who asked Bongardt and his team, “Do you recognize anyone in these photos?” These were the photos of Mihdhar and Hazmi, the two al Qaeda terrorists on AA77 that hit the Pentagon.

The book “Prior Knowledge of 9/11” concluded that it was criminal actions at the CIA and FBI HQ agents and managers, that the CIA had subjugated, Wilshire, Corsi and Middleton, perhaps Maltbie and Frasca, that had allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place, the same conclusion I am sure Kevin Fenton has come to. They first withheld the information that Mihdhar and Hazmi had been at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting with Walid Bin Attash, mastermind of the USS Cole bombing, actually planning the Cole bombing. But what is more horrific, is that these FBI HQ managers and agents that were acting under orders from the CIA, shut down FBI Agent Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi when Bongardt found out on August 28, 2001 that these al Qaeda terrorists were inside of the US and knew that they were here to take part in an al Qaeda attack.

The CIA including Blee, Black and Tenet were also aware of this same information on August 23, 2001, and allowed Wilshire, Corsi and Middleton to continue not to only hide this information on Mihdhar and Hazmi from Bongardt and this team, but allowed them to actually shut down Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi when they knew that by doing so would result in allowing the al Qaeda terrorists to murder thousands of Americans.

It is now also clear that he 9/11 Commission was created for no other reason than to pretend to investigate why the attacks on 9/11 were allowed to take place, and prove to the American people that no one had committed any crime, when it is clear that there had been a massive criminal conspiracy to allow the al Qaeda terrorist to carry out the attacks on 9/11. The 9/11 Commission carefully left out key details so they could show, no one had actually committed any crime and to prove to the American people that the attacks on 9/11 had not been intentionally and deliberately allowed to take place by the CIA.

When you go through the 9/11 Commission report and compare to actually what had taken place that had allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place, you almost have to admire the tremendous skill of the people behind the 9/11 Commission hearings and report to carefully navigate through all of the potential mine fields and present a conclusion to the American people to show that no one was to be blamed for the attacks on 9/11.

What is even more telling is that Tenet had a six hour meeting with President Bush on August 24, 2001, after he knew Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US, and knew they were here to take part in a massive al Qaeda attack that would kill thousands of Americans. Tenet by August 24, 2001 even knew Moussaoui had been arrested when the Minneapolis FBI thought he was a terrorist and was getting flight training on a B747 so he could fly a large airliner into the World Trade Center Towers.

So the big question is what did Tenet tell Bush in the August 24, 2001 meeting, a meeting that Tenet tried to keep secret at the April 14, 2004 9/11 Commission public hearings, so that Roemer would not ask him what he told Bush at that meeting. If you can imagine that, the White actually listed this meeting and the fact Tenet was present right on their web site while Tenet was lying to the 9/11 Commission saying he had attended no such meeting. This just goes to show what happens when you have so many lies that no one can keep them all straight.

So you have two books already and will have at least four books and perhaps 6 books that I know of on this exact same subject by September 11, 2011, the 10th anniversary of the attacks on 9/11.

thanks to the efforts of two self-proclaimed "real truthers" who admit they haven't even read the book.

Meanwhile, Judy Wood's spacebeam opus "Where Did The Towers Go" has four and a half stars.

That's a pretty sad reflection on the state of 9/11 truth.

In reply to your post:

"Kevin's book notes that summit attendance of al-Quso and some others "cannot be verified" (up.89), and also notes that an FBI agent tentatively ID'd him or someone who looked like him in a Malaysia photo."

This unfortunately is misinformation by Corsi and by the DOJ IG in their report. I found a number of instances where the DOJ actually assisted Corsi in her testimony. They actually made up facts and then added them to the DOJ IG report, to give her credibility when she had none and in this case assisted her testimony to give it credibility on why she set this meeting up in New York City.

After carefully going over the DOJ IG report with a fine tooth comb, I found that the excuse that Fahad al-Quso was at Kuala Lumpur to be nothing but a complete ruse on the part of Wilshire and Shannon, and later by Corsi, to provide a reason, in this case even a ridiculous reason, to the FBI agents working for the DOJ IG, when they were interviewed on why they had set that in New York City meeting up on June 11 2001. I found in mid-May 2001, that both Wilshire and Shannon actually had FBI Agent Ali Soufan' request for information from the CIA , on any al Qaeda meeting in Kuala Lumpur and on any information the CIA had on Walid Bin Attash, the mastermind of the Cole bombing.

It turns out knowing that Wilshire and Shannon had Soufan's request for information, is what ultimately unraveled this entire criminal conspiracy at the CIA.

Instead of giving Soufan the information that he had requested, Wilshire, it clearly looks like under orders from his CIA higher level managers, was moved over to the FBI by the CIA, and then set this meeting up just so the CIA could find out what the FBI Cole bombing investigators had found out about the Kuala Lumpur meeting. Did they know that Mihdhar and Hazmi had been at this meeting with Bin Attash actually planning the Cole bombing? This was in fact the horrific secret that the CIA wanted to keep hidden from the FBI Cole bombing investigators.

The fact that Bin Attash along with Mihdhar and Hazmi came over to Bangkok on January 8, 2000 to get the money from al-Quso is proof that al-Quso was not at Kuala Lumpur, there would have been no need for this trip if al-Quso had gotten to Kuala Lumpur. The fact that Quso was stuck in Bangkok on January 6 and Bin Attash came over on January 8, left no time for al-Quso to get to Kuala Lumpur. Hence I concluded that there was no possible way al-Quso could have been in any of the photos taken at Kuala Lumpur.

So why is this important. It is this fact that is almost the very heart of understanding this massive criminal conspiracy at the CIA

It shows the massive criminal conspiracy not only to hide the information that Mihdhar and Hazmi had been at the Kuala Lumpur meeting planning the Cole bombing, but shows the immense efforts that the CIA went to find out what the FBI Cole bombing investigators had found out about that meeting. When the CIA got Soufan's request for information in April 2001, they thought that the FBI Cole bombing investigators had found out about Mihdhar and Hazmi in their search for Bin Attash.

At that meeting on June 11, 2001, Corsi presented one photo with just Mihdhar and Hazmi in it along side a tree. At that point CIA officer Shannon asked Bongardt and his team "Do you recognize anyone in these photos?" But the CIA knew exactly what Mihdhar and Hazmi looked like so what were they thinking? That al-Quso had turned in to a tree. Understanding this meeting is again almost central to under standing this entire criminal conspiracy at the CIA and FBI HQ.

Your post "loose nuke":

"Wilshire under orders; seems likely, considering all the other things that went "wrong" that enabled 9/11, that Blee was acting with the knowledge and approval of others, and that he and Wilshire would not have acted on their own. You haven't provided evidence that Tenet and Black were involved; you stated that you find it inconceivable that they weren't, and the CIA appears a certain way. It's conceivable that people Blee knew, who may have been CIA alums or highly connected in the MIC and/or Bush administration, had made it clear they wanted the attacks to succeed and that Blee would be rewarded if he made it happen as far as Alec Station was concerned, and protected from any fallout. Blee could then have brought Wilshire on board. A full investigation could reveal the truth. Kevin's book documents a number of false statements by Tenet, as well as false statements to Black by Blee. He doesn't make a judgment on whether or not Tenet or Black consciously facilitated the plot, he just lays out what's known and isn't and examines possible scenarios."

I had come to the conclusion in late 2006 that Blee, Black, and Tenet were equally involved from a number of things. One the meeting at the White House involved Blee, Black and Tenet. This shows the very close relationship amongst these three high level CIA managers. Second information in the CIA seemed to pass right to the very top very quickly. The fact that the Minneapolis FBI called the CIA for help about Moussaoui and this went right to Tenet by August 23, 2001, very quickly, shows how quickly information moved up the line right to the very top of the CIA and Tenet.

Long after I had come to this conclusion, the article in Harper's on January 2007 sealed the deal. This article describes "James" as the head of the Bin Laden unit and if you can imagine this, the head of the CIA Rendition unit, more why this is so horrific in this in a later post. This article said it was illegal to actually know "James" real name, but is was immediately clear that "James" was none other than Richard Earl Blee. It also said Blee and Black were very close, they were close friends. So it is inconceivable that Blee would have been holding anything back from Black, any miscommunication over Mihdhar and Hazmi and the fact they could not be found in Bangkok for a few days, in my opinion had been inadvertent and not a sign Blee, or Wilshire for that matter had ever acted in any way on their own.

Note you said: "You haven't provide evidence that Black and Tenet were involved.

The analysis of the identification of Bin Attash from the Kuala Lumpur photos on January 4, 2001 shows that Tenet and Black were totally involved. Why is that?

Because the groups that were criminally withholding the fact after this date, that Bin Attash had been identified in Kuala Lumpur photos, were the Yemen CIA Station, the Pakistan CIA Station, and the CIA Bin Laden unit.

The CIA Bin Laden unit was under Blee who was under Black. The Yemen Station and the Pakistan CIA Station were under I believe, John Gannon, who was under Tenet. Both Black and Gannon in fact were under Tenet. Not only did all of these different groups take part in this massive criminal conspiracy, but even the cables that went back to and from these groups, had information on Bin Attash and his identification at Kuala Lumpur when they went to the CIA, but had Bin Attash and any mention of a meeting in Kuala Lumpur left out when they went to the FBI. To carry out this massive criminal conspiracy had to have taken Tenet himself, since many of these managers were actually in completely different groups which ultimately only reported to Tenet. This ties all three of the highest CIA managers to this massive criminal conspiracy at the CIA. Note on February 1, 2001 the CIA Pakistan alat was standing right next to Soufan as Soufan was having the Joint CIA/FBI source identify Bin Attash from the Yemen provide passport photo.

I am sure the entire CIA was on needles and pins praying that this CIA alat and the Joint source kept their mouths shut and said absolutely nothing about the Bin Attash identification just the prior month from the Kuala Lumpur photo or even any mention of the meeting in Kuala Lumpur. That would have destroyed this entire criminal conspiracy immediately and exposed the CIA's criminal culpability in allowing the Cole bombing.

When Tenet and the CIA found out that Bin Attash had taken part in the Kuala Lumpur meeting and knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi had been at that same meeting the CIA knew that all three had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing. At that point the CIA instituted a massive criminal conspiracy to hide this information from the FBI Cole bombing investigators to prevent the fact that the CIA itself had been criminal culpable in allowing the Cole bombing to take place from ever coming out.

That unfortunately was heart the criminal conspiracy that had ultimately allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place.