CIA Files: DIA Sources 'Remote Viewed' Attacks in NYC and Washington, D.C. 

BY GARY S BEKKUM

"New York City will be the target of an unexpected terrorist attack, by air and ground, of ...suicide-forces...Washington will also be a target, simultaneously with the primary targets being the White House...Pentagon..."

Distribution Source : ArriveNet

Date : Sunday, October 30, 2005

Washington, D.C. -- (ArriveNet - Oct 30, 2005) -- One of our 'beltway contacts' hinted that his friend at CIA was aware of the 9/11 events prior to their occurrence. Naturally we were intrigued by this hearsay, but if this was true we needed evidence.

Shortly after this we came across a 1983 document that suggested INSCOM personnel had provided unofficial intelligence about an air attack targeted against the U.S. Capitol Building, in Washington, D.C. The identification of the name of the pilot of that predicted flight appeared to closely match 9/11 terrorist Ziad Jarrah, a curious coincidence at the very least.

Over the last month we have continued to search STAR GATE tasking documents, and discovered a series of reports describing an air attack against a target or targets in New York City, the Pentagon Building in Washington, D.C. and the White House. Of greater interest were some of the details that came to light, including the fact that the attack against the White House (or perhaps the Capitol Building, as in the earlier 1983 document and in some 9/11 reports) would fail, and that the President would survive.

It was readily apparent that the intelligence officers tasking their sources in 1986 had not been fully prepared for information about events some fifteen years into the future. Their immediate concern was predicting terrorist events during the summer of 1986, but the data they received was so ominous that it could not be ignored, and they sought additional information beyond normal DIA SUN STREAK remote viewing protocols.

"From 032030 July 1986 to 062300 July 1986 has been nicknamed "Liberty Weekend, the 100th Birthday Party", for the Statue of Liberty. Such events are thought to provide lucrative opportunities for hostile terrorist activities. If such activities do occur or can be thwarted, they would most likely be reported in the news media. As time passes, accurate/detailed reports concerning such events will be published for all to know."

"DESCRIBE THE LIBERTY WEEKEND EVENTS REPORTED IN THE FUTURE WHICH ARE NECESSARY TO KNOW NOW TO THWART ANY HOSTILE TERRORIST ACTIVITIES."

The 1986 working report continues:

"Responses to this latest tasking were inconclusive and failed to positively identify a target of possible terrorist activity within the US. An abbreviated edited listing of the key elements of these responses are as follows:

A strong impression that (the attack) was not directed .... at a specific site but at an activity/event. One aspect of the site involved (an) airfield (military or civilian) including jet aircraft and a strong impression of one particular "twin engined propeller aircraft". Two individuals...wearing flightsuits ... impression (they) are some sort of aviators."

We have in the above an interpretation of the raw imagery provided by multiple DIA sources. The intelligence officer(s) looking at the data were able to ascertain several interesting facts from the viewers' reports.

The vagueness of the the site may have been due to the fact that at least four sites and aircraft were involved in the 9/11 attacks. Thus one coordinated conspiracy, involving four closely related events at four locations (targets being the two towers of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the White House and or the Capitol Building in Washington D.C.) are today not named for an attack at a specific site, but rather for the events we call 9/11.

In order to clarify the vast amount of information, and the various locations described by the sources, they were tasked once again with new instructions:

"IF A TERRORIST INCIDENT IS GOING TO OCCUR WHICH MAY BE PREVENTED OR BLUNTED, DESCRIBE THE TARGET."

The intelligence officer(s) arrived at the following interpretation:

"Responses to the above cited instructions were much more concise and ominous in nature. There is, however, a distinct risk of skewed results. This skewing of the reported data can be caused by a number of technical problems generated by the somewhat unusual procedures utilized in this project, e.g., repeated tasking of essentially the same target by the Sources using a variety of techniques, the possibility of certain psychic phenomena (noise) caused by the military and para-military preparations for the security procedures of the events of Liberty Weekend and the possibility of pre-conceptions on the part of the interviewers being reported through psychic channels by the Sources. Other more complex problems occur when dealing in future perceptions which may have confused the data received by the Sources. These final responses, edited for clarity, are provided in their entirety, to permit independent-appraisal of the responses given to the interviewers:

NYC (New York City) will be the target of an unexpected terrorist attack, by air and ground, of ...suicide-forces..."

In fact the World Trade Center was attacked first by ground, in the 1993 garage bombing, followed by the massive air attack on September 11, 2001.

If one removes the obvious 1986 temporal overlay and the biased reference to al Khadaffi and then President Ronald Reagan, and instead makes the identification with al Qaeda, the remaining details are strikingly accurate:

"Because of the number of people in attendance, American and foreign, and the televised coverage, there will be international repercussions... Washington will also be a target, simultaneously with (the) primary targets (being) the White House...(and the) Pentagon..."

In the above, we excised any interpretive details identifying President Reagan, cold war era relations, and Khadaffi. What remains is the correct identification of the 9/11 targets.

This is further reinforced by what follows:

"(SOURCE 021) NOTE: This particular Source commented later that these perceptions were so strong and clear that she attempted to flag down a member of the interviewer staff on the highway to report her on-going perceptions. The Source further became somewhat anxious by her unusually clear perceptions due to two personal agendas - a spouse who is assigned to the Pentagon and a sister who is intending to participate in the NYC ceremonies. She went so far as to request guidance from the interviewer staff on what actions, if any she should take, to insure the safety of her relatives, bearing in mind that as of yet, she has not been told the nature of the questions or the entire project."

Additional details are available at the Starstream Research website.