SPECULATION: The core rationale for not closing Quantanomo is to block all legal processes re potential supporters of the 911 attack from being conducted in the USA; the concern being opening 911TRUTH testimony that might indicate that “others beyond Al-Qaeda” were involved.

  •     As discussed later, the “others” are NOT FORMAL SOCIETAL SYSTEMS, such a governmental administrations, and may involve individuals from national, governmental, corporate, religious, professional categories.
  •     ALL other legal attempts to open the 911 issue in USA courts have been blocked, including the Supreme Court.

Since (1) the “global war on terrorism” (including two major wars), (2) the domestic USA Patriot Act Security State, and (3)  much of the global turbulence re Muslims were initiated by responses to the USA established Al-Qaeda Conspiracy hypothesis for 911, we can assume that calling this established conspiracy hypothesis to question would be highly disruptive to both national and global processes.

  • For example, what if – in an open and fair court hearing – the defense would seek to present solid evidence that “others” planned and supported the hijacking, the demolition of the THREE towers, and the immediate cover up?  I will not speculate on who the “others”might be, except that they are probably still around and very powerful.
  •     Imagine scenarios for the past decade+ if the 911 phenomenon had not occurred? 911 was THE game changer!

The evidence is overwhelming that “others” were deeply involved – indeed critical to the “success” of the attacks.This evidence is available online in many forms and critiques have been rebutted. The evidence continues to grow as the gate security is also strengthened.

  •     There is even evidence that Bin Laden and his branch of Al-Qaeda were NOT involved. Argument may be made that the objectives of movements such as Al-Qaeda (even if not initially assisted by the CIA to drive the Russians from Afghanistan) would have better succeed had not the USA been mobilized to counter them. True, recruitment may be enhanced by US military violence, but these movements prefer to work against other regional or local systems and not distant powers. Contemporary Al-Qaeda-type networks are much the product of the USA global war on terror.
  •     Those continuing the cover up may not have been involved in the plot, but would still be implicated.
  •     The strategy is to keep 911TRUTH in a tightly controlled bubble, as total suppression is impossible. No renowned spokesperson is permitted to speak 911TRUTH publicly. Some support continued suppression for fear of catastrophic consequences if exposed – a conspiracy TOO BIG TO BE REVEALED.

Public trials of 911 “conspirators” outside Quantanomo may open this tightly monitored and controlled gate. With this gate opened, the gates blocking quality investigations into assassinations (JFK, RFK, MLK and many others) might be opened.  This might result in public realization that “conspiracy” is, and has been, a major pillar of societal process.

  •     IMPORTANT NOTE “Conspiracy” as used here is a process among an “informal” group of individual persons (conspiratorial gangs) – NOT a policy, or even a formal decision, of a formal agency, institution, corporation, or government. – although some “conspirators” may be formal members of such societal systems (but not sanctioned to be conspiratorial). Other institutional members might be silent observers of some conspiratorial acts but not active participants in the CONSPIRATORIAL GANGS: who simply do things for their own benefit without informing others of their intentions.

A key propaganda device is to define conspiracy as a formal action by a societal system, an “Inside Job”, (which would be difficult to keep secret) and thus divert attention from the informal conspiratorial gangs. Possibly the biggest meta-conspiracy by conspiratorial gangs (and those who gain from their actions) is the CONSPIRACY DENIAL MOVEMENT (which includes flooding the media with truly stupid “conspiracy theories” to mask serious “conspiracy hypotheses for scientific analysis”).

  •         Question: Who introduced the term “inside Job” and pushed its use in the 911TRUTH movement? This may be an example of how conspiratorial gangs also infiltrate conspiracy-TRUTH movements and influence (if not control) their actions.
  •         Societal systems may be re-conceived as an ecology of conspiratorial gangs. This insight was triggered by the concept of Deep Politics by Peter Dale Scott.


Author: nuet

01/24/1935. BS-physics RPI 1956; MS-physics UofChicago 1958; PhD-physics Yale 1965; PhD-Edu Psy Uof MInnesota 1970. Auroral Research Byrd Station, Antarctica 11/1960-02/1962. MINNEMAST curriculum dev 1964-68. Woodstock. faculty Pima Community College, Tucson 1974-1997. Transdisciplinary scientist, philosopher, educator, futurist, activist. PC user since 1982. "Wife". daughter, 2 grandsons. 5 dogs & 7 cats. Lacks mental imagery in all sensory domains.


9/11 STUDY PROPOSED XMAS DAY, 2001.     An article in the NYTimes on December 25, 2001 < http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/25/nyregion/a-nation-challenged-the-towers-experts-urging-broader-inquiry-in-towers-fall.html?pagewanted=1reports  > reports a call by Senators Schumer and Clinton for a scientific study of why the towers had collapsed, including the 3d tower #7. It claimed this study was needed to protect future building from being so damaged by airplane crashes and fires. 


This article came to my attention via email recently (Feb 20, 2013) and I initially mistook it as a recent article which raised concern: why would "they" risk calling attention to the primary evidence for tower demolition from the AE911TRUTH [Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architects_%26_Engineers_for_9/11_Truth ].  Because these best experts on building structure and collapse have concluded that the towers were safe from airplane crashes, informs us now as to why the study called for by the NY senators was never "officially" done.  Actually, it was done by AE911TRUTH with the conclusion that the towers could only have been collapsed by demolition.

Why the coincidence of my learning of this NYTimes article only a few days from my posting this? It was not sent in response to my post. The NYTimes article may actually have be influenced by those who later formed AE911TRUTH, as the article is critical of the study of the tower collapse being done at that time.


It should be noted that "studies" have been published (and popularized) claiming that the planes and fires were sufficient causes of the tower collapses, but AE911TRUTH have countered these studies in their own reports. However, there is no "court" to mediate this controversy.