How convenient that Alberto Gonzales told the "truth" (supposedly) at the congressional hearing AFTER he was put under oath.

It's pretty funny that "protesters" sang Steam's "Na Na Hey Hey Kiss Him Goodbye" at the end.

And 50+ "I do not recall"'s.

It doesn't get any better than this. (except Wolfowitz's B.S. — and all of the others, and the future events to come that haven't come out yet)

"Democracy Now" with Amy Goodman covered this very well. (as usual)

When my paranoia kicks in, I can't help but wonder if the Virginia Tech shooting incident was an attempt to pull the media away from this. But it didn't last long enough. Perhaps someone miscalculated. Or perhaps it truly has no relationship.

Although the Mossad's "warning" did name the "lead hijacker patsies" it was *non-specific regarding targets*, and less than three weeks later, Mossad agents were filming the first hit on the target.

That's criminal and treasonous.

That the Israelis were dancing is not hearsay. Police reports describe them jumping up and down and high-fiving. Look at the Wayne Madsen piece again

http://waynemadsenreport.com/Artstudents.htm

and the original report for Scotlands's Sunday Herald:

http://www.venusproject.com/911/did_israel_sacrifice_wtc.html

Here's one of the relevant quotes:

"Police Chief John Schmidig said: "We got an alert to be on the lookout for a white Chevrolet van with New Jersey registration and writing on the side. Three individuals were seen celebrating in Liberty State Park after the impact. They said three people were jumping up and down.""

Although other nations gave warnings, no other nation besides Israel had several instances where their own agents were caught surveilling the patsies and documenting and celebrating the first attack.

Although top officials at NORAD are certainly involved, Wolfowitz and Feith were number 2 and 3 at the Pentagon. Wolfowitz was Deputy Director, Feith was in charge of policy and "special plans." (The translated name of the Mossad is the Foundation for Intelligence and *Special Tasks*) They had to be aware of or responsible for the stand-down policy. In America, the military takes orders from the DoD.

Although the Mossad's warnings regarding 9/11 appear to exonerate it, that is not the case. Former Mossad case officer Victor Ostrovsky in his two excellent books By Way of Deception and The Other Side of Deception demonstrates that the Mossad often uses useless warnings as a way of making themselves look innocent when in fact the opposite is true:

http://www.marwenmedia.com/articles_images/BookReview.html

"Admony, then the head of Mossad, decided they would simply give the Americans the usual general warning, a vague notice that they had reason to believe someone might be planning an operation against them. But this was so general and so commonplace, it was like sending a weather report; unlikely to raise any particular alarm or prompt increased security precautions. In the six months following receipt of this information, for example, there were more than 100 general warnings of car-bomb attacks. One more would not heighten US concerns or surveillance."

"Admony, in refusing to give the Americans specific information on the truck, said, "No, we're not going to protect the Americans. They're a big country. Send only the regular information."

Once one understands the methodology of the Mossad and its management of false flag attacks - as well as the massive involvement of the US - Israeli axis in manufacturing the "War on Terror" - to accept the idea that the Mossad is innocent because it gave weak and useless warnings to its partner in crime the CIA becomes absurd.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-boehlert/why-was-wolfowitz-so-clue_b_29486.html

text....

Why Was Wolfowitz So Clueless On The Morning of 9/11? 

Despite the exhaustive work of the 9/11 Commission and its detailed final report, the number of oddities surrounding the events of 9/11, and particularly the government's botched attempt at defend a country under attack, remain numerous. One peculiarity I've always wondered about is why Paul Wolfowitz, then the Deputy Secretary of Defense and the number two person at the Pentagon, was so completely clueless the morning of the deadly attacks. As the events unfolded live on television and senior administration officials scrambled to make sense of the horrific events, Wolfowitz appeared to be in a haze. Or perhaps a cocoon. Now, as 9/11 remembrance week draws to a close, I thought it might worth examining the odd inaction by such a senior member of the administration. The same senior official who later played a central role in planning the disastrous war in Iraq. (And no, by raising questions about Wolfowitz I'm not signing off on any larger, 9/11 conspiracy theory.)

Here's how Wolfowitz, taken from a May 9, 2003 interview transcript, described his morning on that unforgettable day: