Randy Glass is an ex-conman who worked as an FBI informant, and claims to have had advanced knowledge of 9/11. Xymphora summed up the story here:
(As you can see, we've snipped 8 points here as it's a long article, and this page is focusing on Glass. But if you want the context, or more thoughts on possible Pakistani involvement in 9/11, then by all means follow the above link to check it out.)
There are two major charges here, then.
First, that Rajaa Gulum Abbas said "those towers are coming down" and this means he knew about the attacks in advance.
And second, Glass later gained more specific foreknowledge of attacks on the World Trade Center, and made several efforts to convey this to the Government prior to 9/11.
Let's take a closer look at each.
Rajaa Gulum Abbas
Perhaps the earliest claimed example of supposed 9/11 foreknowledge comes from a man called Rajaa Gulum Abbas, who is often quoted as saying in 1999 that "those towers [the WTC] are coming down". The blog Xymphora said it was "one of the clearest incidents of foresight of September 11", and History Commons covers the story here:
It sounds very clear. But is this exactly what Abbas said? Everyone talks of this tape, but where is it? The MSNBC special here said they'd obtained an audio copy of the meeting, but there's no mention of this comment, or even the World Trade Centre (source). It seems we're relying entirely on the word of (former conman) Randy Glass. And what sites like Xymphora and History Commons aren't telling you is that an early account of the Abbas comment was slightly different:
Here it's not a definitive "those towers are coming down", which implies specific knowledge of an event, just a more general desire to see it "reduced to rubble", which could simply be a wish for a more successful attack on the lines of the 1993 WTC bombing (and keep in mind that not even this version of the Abbas comments has been independently verified).
There may be reasons for this, of course.
Perhaps "those towers are coming down" and "reduced to rubble" are part of the same comment, or maybe two separate statements. History Commons tells us that "this ISI agent later makes two other references to an attack on the WTC", after all (although no-one seems to be able to tell us exactly what they were).
And maybe there's an explanation for why the tape of this meeting seems to have reached the media, but no-one has yet commented on this particular part.
But another possibility is that Glass has made this appear a slightly clearer example of foresight than it really was at the time. Without more evidence, it's hard to tell what the truth might be.
Randy Glass has said he had advance knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, and attempted to pass these on to the US government through several high-level contacts. Cooperative Research discuss the issue here:
Most 9/11 researchers focus on the information Glass may have passed Senator Bob Graham, perhaps because it's easier to fit him into some ISI-related plot; he was meeting with ISI chief General Mahmood Ahmed on the morning of 9/11, after all. But as Cooperative Research points out, there were others involved here, including Democrat Ron Klein. Here's how their position was represented in the Palm Beach Post article they reference:
Klein was the first person to speak to Glass. It appears that upcoming attacks on the World Trade Centre were the main focus of what Glass had to say, yet Klein "doesn't recall any talk from Glass about the World Trade Center". How can this be? Klein did his bit in passing the information on to Graham's office, so is he now covering for him? Why?
Things might be clearer if we knew exactly what information Glass passed on, of course. Sander Hicks' book "The Big Wedding: 9/11, The Whistle-Blowers, & The Cover-Up" claims to tell us just that, by reproducing a fax that Glass said he sent to Graham's office. Here's a scan we found on an Internet forum:
Here's the text, as close as we can tell:
It hasn't been verified that Glass did actually send this to Graham, but even if he did, and he was believed, the information is hardly precise. "Airplanes being used" - what sort of planes? Used in what way? When? What's all this about nuclear components?
Glass did tell Hicks elsewhere that "I provided [Yonts] with all of the information and material that I had about airplanes being flown into the World Trade Center", though. Where did his come from? The key line here is "information I've gotten from the State Dept. about the airplanes being used", and that forms the LIHOP scenario in Hicks' book. Hicks reports Glass saying that he called a State Department contact, bluffed him by saying he knew all about the World Trade Center, and was told "Randy, listen, you cannot mention any of these things, especially airplanes being used to fly into the World Trade Center". The explanation was this:
Remarkable. This most secret information just happens to be available to this State Department official, who happily passes over all of it to a convicted fraudster, because he is a "straight guy". But even more amazingly, Hicks says Glass has this conversation on tape. He goes to listen to it on March 18 2005, but then Glass decides he doesn't want to play it after all, it would be too dangerous. Uh, so it's not dangerous to make these accusations in the first place, or reveal to the conspirators that you have strong evidence that could expose the plot? Anyway, the position appears to be that Glass does have this evidence, but we just can't hear it.
It's much the same story elsewhere. Hicks reports Glass saying he has a tape of a meeting with Bob Graham and Charlie Yonts, but can we hear it? No. He also says he taped his October 16 2002 appearance before the Senate/ House Joint Inquiry into 9/11, but we can't hear that, either. The rationale is identical: it would be "suicide" to go public with the tape, but apparently isn't suicide to make these accusations in the first place.
The Glass story has received plenty of attention from 9/11 researchers, and it's not difficult to see why. After all, he claims to have taped evidence showing his own and State Department foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks. But what support do we have for this?
The Abbas comment that "those towers are coming down" was earlier reported as a far less definitive comment that he'd like to see them "reduced to rubble", for instance.
Audio tapes of that meeting have apparently been released, yet no-one has mentioned any such threat against the WTC. Sander Hicks says this was a "curious omission", that the same producer Richard Greenberg "then did related follow-up stories that also left out evidence of FBI foreknowledge of 9/11" and that the media seemed to be "deliberately treading lightly around an established CIA/ISI client relationship". The Washington Post said audio tapes had been shared with them, though, and they also made no reference to the comment. And if the tape contained such embarassing evidence then why would it be released to the media at all? Surely another possibility is that the audio contains no clear threat against the World Trade Centre at all.
Glass spoke of his concerns first to Ron Klein, who said "he doesn't recall any talk from Glass about the World Trade Center".
The supposed fax to Graham is unverified, and in any event contains only limited information on the attacks.
And although Glass says he has various tapes that can support his claims, he seems unwilling to play them to anyone.
Right now everything is dependent on the word of Randy Glass, then, and with various reasons to question his version of events, we don't think that's good enough. We predict this story will go precisely nowhere unless and until it receives some corroboration, either from the tapes Glass claims he has, or another source.
Still, plainly you don't have to take our word for it. Go read more on Glass at History Commons, Dave Emory, or The Yirmeyahu Review, see if they fairly reflect the evidence, or have anything new to add of their own, something more substantial than just reporting what Glass says. And then make your own mind up.