Let me say off the bat, I do not buy the "inside job" conspiracy theory, nor do I believe there were explosives in the building that brought down the towers, etc. Please, don't copy and paste a bunch of links to this thread, as this is not what this is about.
Now, one angle of the conspiracy that WAS intriguing, because my research did prove that the story largely vanished, was the part entwined in this whole mess about the "5 dancing Israelis" that were connected to an arrest made on, or near, the George Washington Bridge. The idea was that these men were going to carry out an attack on the bridge, and the story even morphed in some versions that the explosives were traced back to Mossad (Israeli Intelligence).
I even dug up a Dan Rather news segment regarding the incident that was broadcast on the evening of 9/11/01, so I knew at least to some extent, there was truth to the story.
Well, this goes against just about everything that we have come to learn about 9/11. So, out of sheer curiosity (and to further prove I do look into everything, despite what I believe personally), I filed FOIA requests to multiple agencies regarding the incident. The FBI and the Director of National Intelligence came back with "no records" however, the NSA gave a different response. They offered a "GLOMAR RESPONSE," meaning, they will neither confirm nor deny anything exists. Having had so much time pass after this alleged incident, and the fact that it apparently didn’t happen according to official storylines, wouldn’t they just say they had “No Records”?
Shortly after receiving this response, I filed a FOIA request for all case processing notes, emails, and other documents generated during the processing of this request. The NSA has released many times in the past, these notes and messages that give an inside look at the process of filing FOIAs. It shows how the FOIA request progressed, and sometimes, offers insight to how the final decision was reached. Frequently, there are redactions, primarily due to FOIA exemption (b)(5), which deals with the “deliberative process” of how agencies work/make decisions. It is noted, that (b)(5) is the most controversial FOIA exemption, because it is widely used and overly broad.
That said, the response came in for these notes on my FOIA request, and 100% were denied as being classified TOP SECRET. This was a VERY strange result, as I have yet to find a request for case processing notes, on a FOIA request that received a “GLOMAR” response, that were 100% considered TOP SECRET.
I waited a few years, and filed again on March 30, 2018. In short, after a two year period, documents can then be requested to be reviewed again (either by a FOIA or an MDR, which is a lengthy explanation in itself). In this particular case, I filed a FOIA (and not an MDR) because the NSA would not even acknowledge documents existed, so I did not feel my MDR would have any positive results, since I couldn’t cite any documents for review. Sure enough, I received another GLOMAR response to my 2018 request, and everything could neither be confirmed nor denied.
I appealed on May 2, 2018, and by June 1, 2018, less than a month, the NSA denied my appeal. However, the story got even more strange. They split my appeal into two parts in order to respond properly. The first, was the documents I was requesting regarding the unidentified men on the bridge. They said they supported and agreed with the GLOMAR response, and that was it.
The second part of my request was for the FOIA Case Files / Processing Notes that I asked for that were classified TOP SECRET. They retracted the claim they were classified TOP SECRET, but then still exempted them 100% under FOIA exemptions (b)(3) and (b)(5). So, therefore, they changed the reason for their answer, but their answer was the same none-the-less.
I believe the reason they did this, was based on the root of my appeal. In my official appeal, I stated the following (in part):
“Given also the fact that ‘item 1’ of my request 103943 (FOIA request for case processing notes) yielded documents that were entirely exempted under the FOIA as being TOP SECRET, this strengthens the belief that responsive documents do, in fact, exist. There would be no reason for (what I assume are case processing notes withheld) to be TOP SECRET on a topic with no responsive records.”
In short, what I was saying, was that if they will “neither confirm nor deny” records exist, but then classify my FOIA Case Processing notes as TOP SECRET across the board, there is something there. I believe this part of my appeal may have influenced the NSA to say they were “incorrect” in that assessment, but then gave other reasons for a denial which would not allow me to draw that same conclusion. Was this truly a mistake? Or is this an attempt to cover-up the fact that I pieced together the evidence to prove documents exist in a case where they did not want to admit to that?
The documents and letters (and more details) can be seen here: http://www.theblackvault.com/documentarchive/91101-israeli-men-attempted-to-explode-george-washington-bridge/