The CIA is trying to create a connection between so-called conspiracy theorists who are in fact critics of the US
government and Bin Laden, said James Henry Fetzer, a
retired professor in Madison, Wisconsin.
The US government labels its critics as conspiracy theorists
in order to dismiss them in the eyes of the public, Fetzer told
Press TV on Friday.
Independent analysts, dubbed by the mainstream US media
as conspiracy theorists, have always maintained that the
September 11, 2001 attacks have been covered-up by the
FBI and senior US officials because it was the “mother of
all false flag” operations.
A man stands in the rubble after the attack of September 11, 2001.
“The fact of the matter is [that] Osama had nothing to with
9/11,” Fetzer said. “This is another desperate attempt by
the government to suppress information about 9/11, about
Osama bin Laden and about US complicity in the events of
9/11, all of which is attempting to do with this single, simply
completely ridiculous story about Osama bin Laden's
reading list which is a complete fabrication.”
On Wednesday, the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence released an extensive list of materials which
they said were collected by US Navy SEALs during the 2011
raid that supposedly killed Bin Laden.
The agency, which oversees US intelligence agencies,
unveiled the contents of Bin Laden's library from his
compound at Abbottabad, Pakistan, in an effort to increase
"transparency."
The release comes four years a reported US military mission
that allegedly killed Bin Laden and allowed commandos to
seize letters, books and other intelligence on the al-Qaeda
terrorist network he founded.
Osama suffered from lung and kidney diseases. A man suffering from these diseases could not have survived another decade to be murdered by a SEAL team in Abbottabad on May 2, 2011.
Washington announced on May 2, 2011 that Bin Laden
was killed in his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, by US
special forces and CIA operatives.
Osama was the founder of al-Qaeda, the terrorist organization
that allegedly claimed responsibility for the September 11, 2001
attacks on the United States.
The September 11 attacks, also known as the 9/11 attacks,
were a series of strikes in the US which killed nearly 3,000
people and caused about $10 billion worth of property and
"I’m disappointed that he only had one of my books. He should’ve read The New Pearl Harbor Revisited!" -- David Ray Griffin
Osama bin Laden -- "Conspiracy Theorist"
It both surprised and pleased me when a reporter for The Guardian, a well-regarded paper in the UK, called to ask about the report that Osama bin Laden's "library" had included a copy of David Ray Griffin's The New Pearl Harbor, one of the first and best exposes of the orchestration of the attacks on 9/11 as having occurred very differently than we have been told.
Obsessed with plots to ruin America, terrified of bugs implanted intooth fillings or women’s clothing, and secluded away from even his confidants, Osama bin Laden may not have been in the most healthy frame of mind during his years in hiding.
It should perhaps come as no surprise, then, that his personal library included conspiracy theories about the occult, the Illuminati – and even 9/11.
Documents and details released by US intelligence officers on Wednesday from the raid that killed bin Laden in 2011 revealed the al-Qaida leader’s collection included The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11, a book that aims to dismantle the official story of the September 11 attacks and alleges that president George W Bush was complicit in them.
“It’s such a crazy story,” Griffin said. “I’m disappointed that he only had one of my books. He should’ve read [The New] Pearl Harbor Revisited!”
Informed by the Guardian that Bin Laden owned a copy of his book, author and retired theologian David Ray Griffin said “it’s a surprise” and that he was at a loss for words. “It’s such a crazy story,” Griffin said. “I’m disappointed that he only had one of my books. He should’ve read [The New] Pearl Harbor Revisited!"
Griffin’s book poses more questions than it does theories about what happened on September 11, arguing that the 9/11 commission and Bush administration concealed and distorted the truth in the service of larger geopolitical aims.
“I don’t doubt that Osama would have found Griffin’s brilliant book really informative,” said Jim Fetzer, a founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth, “but Osama died on about 15 December 2001. He was suffering from serious diseases, including a kidney disease, and it’s hard to get those dialysis machines in and out of those caves in Afghanistan.
“Even Fox News reported this at the time, although I don’t regard that as an always reliable source,” Fetzer added.
Indeed, while the wrinkle of Bin Laden’s taste for tales about 9/11 truthers and the occult was “fascinating”, Fetzer said, the entirety of the documents released Wednesday, as well as the 2011 raid by US Navy Seals on Bin Laden’s Pakistan compound in which the al-Qaida leader was killed, constitute “elaborate political theater” in Fetzer’s mind.
“Osama bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11,” Fetzer said, dismissing the 2004 videotape in which Bin Laden took credit for the attacks. “The whole story we’ve been told is a complete charade.”
The reaction at hubs of conspiracy theory was similarly unbowed by revelations from the 2011 raid.
“Am I the only one who thinks that a bunch of CIA documents released years after the fact are nothing more than propaganda?” asked Jesse Wyneck at InfoWars, the website of conspiracy theorist and radio host Alex Jones.
“I wish they’d get more creative with this nonsense,” bemoaned another commenter.
“We live in a world of lies. Nothing more,” said another.
The commenter badgerpit suggested that Bin Laden’s possession of a book about 9/11 might be “a sort of wink”. “They get away with everything so I imagine their confidence to rub stuff in our face is high."
Jones himself did not broach the disclosures on his Wednesday radio show, instead railing on about changing gender norms in American society and declaring: “The fall of humankind is here. It’s going down.”
On the other great center of truthers, Reddit, people were less credulous about conspiracy theories. There reactions ranged from “9/11 was a fraud” to blaming Nasa to “I bet they used to sit around the compound at night and read each other the theories for laughs.”
Bin Laden’s odd collection also included The Conspirators’ Hierarchy, a book about how an elite cadre of manipulators are somehow involved in everything from the Kennedy assassination to the East India trading company and the international drug trade.
Fake Death Photos of Osama bin Laden
Bin Laden also owned Bloodlines of the Illuminati, by Fritz Springmeier, an Oregon man who has written extensively about the eponymous semi-historical sect, mind control, Jehovah’s witnesses and Freemasons.
At least one believer maintains that the fatidic date of 1 May links the Illuminati to the deaths of Adolf Hitler and Bin Laden, even though Hitler killed himself on 30 April 1945 and Bin Laden was killed in the early hours of 2 May 2011, Pakistan time.
Jones has also linked Bin Laden to the Illuminati, albeit through the more tortuous route of the Mossad, CIA and MI6, among other agents.
The al-Qaida leader’s taste in rightwing perspectives on conspiracy did not end with Springmeier: he also had a copy of The Secrets of the Federal Reserve, a book by Holocaust denier Eustace Mullins, who during his life shared his antisemitic sentiments with Ezra Pound and wrote an article in praise of Hitler.
Mind control was also plainly a fixation for Bin Laden, whose reading materials included Senate testimony from 1977 on the CIA’s MK Ultra program on behavioral modification, and a book by Noam Chomsky titled Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Democratic Societies.
Perhaps the oddest book in Bin Laden’s collection was The Secret Teachings of All Ages, a 1928 tome by the Canadian mystic Manly Palmer Hall. The son of a dentist and a chiropractor, Hall became a famous spiritualist and lecturer, and filled his book with ideas about tarot readings, alchemy and Shakespeare trutherism.
Despite the eager discussion of conspiracy theories, few online dared to theorize what Bin Laden might have made of Hall.
Virtually all the most popular theories about 9/11 have been thoroughly debunked by both the investigators of the 9/11 commission and independent experts in aviation, engineering, the military and other fields.
While this newspaper report could be interpreted as complete and accurate, the fact of the matter is that it only cites my conclusions without citing any of the evidence that substantiates that finding, rendering my position as an argument with no premises.
What The Guardian didn't tell you
What I told The Guardian during the phone interview included that there were local obituaries at the time, that he was buried in an unmarked grave in Afghanistan in accordance with Muslim tradition; that David Ray Griffin had published a book about it, Osama bin Laden: Dead or Alive?, that Nicholas Kollerstrom had published an article about it; and that Fox News on 26 December 2001 had reported his death, which makes Fox the leader in coverage of all the newspapers in the world.
So when I discovered that The Guardian had omitted my premises and only published my conclusion, I composed a comment on the article, which was still there the last time I checked. Here is what I published about the article and my interview:
Indeed, as I explained in a recent article exposing the "revelations" by Seymour Hersch (that Obama had taken more credit than he deserved in tracking down and taking out Osama, because it was largely the work of Pakistan intelligence agents), it was convenient to resurrect him and kill him again to benefit Obama's political requirements.
Pakistani Compound Owner watch TV using a remote
None of the residents of the town in which the compound was situated had ever seen Osama bin Laden, where the man using the remote to watch TV was identified as the compound's owner, who was not Osama bin Laden. As I explained in "Zero Dark Thirty: The deeper, darker truths", the raid was a piece of political theater that had no correlation with reality.
There is an irony here because, when I concluded my conversation with the reporter for The Guardian who had called me, I expressed my admiration for The Guardian as one of the few newspapers in the world that continued to show dedication to the truth and determination to pursue its publication. I noticed he seemed to be affected by my remarks but, in retrospect, it does not appear to have been for the reasons foremost in my mind at the time.
Osama was suffering from debilitating kidney disease and was also reported to have Marfan syndrome. It's tough to get those dialysis machines in and out of those caves in Afghanistan. His purported burial at sea was not in accord with Muslim traditions and the claims to have DNA confirmation of his identity were far too fast to have been scientifically possible. The death photos were faked. None of the official account warrants belief. It's all a fabrication.
Perhaps no question within the scope of 9/11 research generates as much heat and as little light as questions that have arisen over the role of the aircraft on 9/11, which has come to be known by the name of “planes/no planes” and of “video fakery”. While I had long since concluded that no plane had crashed inShanksvilleand that, while a Boeing 757 appears to have flown toward and then over thePentagon, I was personally unable to bring myself to take the idea that no real airplanes had hit the North or the South Tower until nearly two years of being verbally assailed by Morgan Reynolds, who understood these issues far better than I, where his studies can be found on his web site,nomoregames.net, especially a response to criticism he has receivedfor raising the issue during a FOX News appearance. Morgan has also authored excellent critiques of alternative theories of how theTwin Towers were destroyed. It was the dawning realization that video fakery and real planes were logically consistent, since video fakery could have been used to conceal features of the planes or of their entry into the buildings, that enabled me to take a serious look to sort out what was going on here. Even I initially thought the very idea was quite bizarre.
During the research I have done on this question, some of the most important reasons to question the use of planes on 9/11 are (1) that Flights 11 and 77 were not even scheduled to fly that day and, (2) that, according to FAA Registration records I have in hand, the planes corresponding to Flights 93 and 175 were not deregistered until 28 September 2005, which raises the questions, “How can planes that were not in the air have crashed on 9/11?” and “How can planes that crashed on 9/11 have still been in the air four years later?”
We have studies (3) by Elias Davidsson demonstrating that the government has never been able to prove that any of the alleged “hijackers” were aboard any of those planes and research (4) by A.K. Dewdney and by David Ray Griffin demonstrating that the purported phone calls from those planes were faked. And (5), as Col. George Nelson, USAF (ret.) has observed, although there are millions of uniquely identifiable components of those four planes, the government has yet to produce even one. My purpose here is not to persuade anyone to believe the 9/11 planes were phantom flights on 9/11, but simply to lay out some of the evidence that supports that conclusion, even though I myself was initially unwilling to take it seriously.
Flights 11 and 77: The BTS Tables
The first to notice that American Airlines Flights 11 and 77 were not even scheduled to fly on 9/11 was the brilliant Australian jazz musician, Gerard Holmgren, who was interviewed by David West on 27 June 2005.
Others, such as Nick Kollerstrom, “9 Keys to 9/11″, have also reported the same difficulty with the government’s official account.
If AA Flight 11 did not even take off from Boston’s Logan Airport on the morning of 9/11, then it cannot possibly have hit the North Tower around the 96th floor at 0846 hours and thereby brought about the death of its 92 passengers.
And if AA Flight 77 did not take off from Dulles International on the morning of 9/11, then it, also, cannot have crashed into the Pentagon at 0940 hours and thereby brought about the death of its 64 passengers.
Yet that is what the data that Holmgren discovered in the Bureau of Transportation Statistics shows to have been the case. In his new book, 9/11: ENEMIES FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC (2011), Edward Hendrie has published the data tables for both of these alleged flights, where it turns out that the BTS subsequently revised their tables with partial data in order to cover up their absence. For Flight 77, for example:
The tables for AA Flight 77 can be found in Hendrie’s book on pages 9 and 11, while similar tables for AA Flight 11 can be found on pages 8 and 10. The case against the use of planes becomes even more powerful when we realized that, as David Ray Griffin, THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT: OMISSIONS AND DISTORTIONS (2005), explains, Waleed al-Shehri, whom the government claims was aboard AA Flight 11, was interviewed after 9/11 by a London-based newspaper and spoke with the US Embassy in Morocco on 22 September, which would have been remarkable for someone who had died when the plane he allegedly helped to hijacked hit the North Tower.
And the same is true of Ahmed al-Nami and Saeed al-Ghamdi, both alleged to have been aboard Flight 93 and were interviewed by multiple sources, while the Saudi Embassy in Washington, D.C., reported that three other alleged hijackers, Mohand al-Shehri, Salem al-Hazmi, and Abdulzaiz al-Omairi, were all alive and well and living in Saudia Arabia (page 19). Salem al-Hazmi was supposed to have been aboard AA Flight 77 and al-Nami to have piloted AA Flight 11 (page 20), which reinforces the BTS data.
Flight 11: On-Site Evidence
If AA Flight 77 was not even in the air on 9/11, then we should expect to find indications of one or another kind of video fakery in the evidence. As the term should be properly understood, “video fakery” encompasses any use of video to convey a false impression to mislead a target audience. Although Hollywood specializes in the presentation of impossible events, its films do not generally qualify as “video fakery”, insofar as they are not intended to mislead their audience. The situation on 9/11, however, appears to qualify. Indeed, remarkably enough, Jules Naudet, a French filmmaker, just happened to be in the vicinity doing a modest documentary about New York Firemen out looking for a “gas leak”.
Indeed, as Leslie Raphael has explained, that a cameraman should have been in precisely the right position to film this event depended upon a rather large number of conditions—either as a matter of coincidence, as the government would have us believe, or by design.
If this occurred by chance, it’s improbability is astonishingly small. An odd flash occurs just as the flying object makes contact with the building, which may have been the trigger for a prearranged explosion to create a pattern of damage to the side of the building, which turns out to have anomalies of its own.
Both AA Flight 11 and United Flight 175, which is alleged to have hit the South Tower, were Boeing 767s, while AA Flight 77 and United Flight 93 were both Boeing 757s. While individual images are too blurry and indistinct to be even be identifiable as a commercial carrier, much less as a Boeing 767, a time-sequence of the image in motion as it approaches the tower—which was prepared by Rosalee Grable—reveals that it does not bear even a faint resemblance. She has speculated that it might be an arrangement of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).
And when you compare the pattern at the time of impact with what we see subsequently, there does not seem to be lot of room for doubt that they do not appear to be the same. How can four impact points–which suggest that it may be four UAVs–that constitute an extended “Z” have been turned into an impression in the side of the building that has now become an elongated “V”? That video fakery was involved here appears to be difficult to deny.
Flight 77: On-Site Evidence
There appear to be more than a half-dozen arguments against the official account that a 757 hit the Pentagon, which appears to be a fantasy. This “hit point” was too small to accommodate a 100-ton airliner with a 125′ wingspan and a tail that stands 44′ above the ground. The debris is wrong for a Boeing 757: no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage, no tail! Not even the engines, which are made of titanium and steel, were recovered.
According to the official account, AA Flight 77 approached the Pentagon on an acute north-east trajectory, barely skimming the ground at over 500 mph and taking out multiple lampposts, which would have ripped the wing off and caused the plane to burst into flame. The aerodynamics of flight, including “downdraft”, moreover, would have made the official trajectory–flying at high speed barely above ground level–physically impossible, because a Boeing 757 flying over 500 mph could not have come closer than 60 or more feet to the ground, which means that the official account is neither physically nor aerodynamically possible. And the only image that the Pentagon has ever produced of an aircraft approaching the building cannot possibly be a 757:
Russ Wittenburg in the DVD “Zero“, an experienced pilot who flew the planes alleged to have been used on 9/11, states that the Boeing 757 can’t go 500 mph hour at sea level because the air is too dense. Robin Hordon, an air traffic controller, in the same film, explains that the Boeing 757 cannot do the maneuvers attributed to it.
The official story thus appears to entail violations of laws of physics, of engineering, and of aerodynamics, insofar as the damage to the building, the absence of debris, the clear, smooth, unblemished lawn and now its alleged performance are incompatible with a Boeing 757.
Moreover, if a Boeing 757 could have traveled at 500 mph at ground level, it would have caused enormous damage to the grass and the ground, including producing substantial furrows from the low hanging engines. At this point, it appears to be “pilling on” to observe that data from a flight recorder provided to Pilots for 9/11 Truth by the National Transportation Safety Board corresponds to a plane with a different approach and higher altitude, which would have precluded its hitting lampposts or even the building itself, which means that, if the NTSB’s own data corresponds to the Boeing 757 that is alleged to have been flown toward the building, it would have flown over the Pentagon rather than hit it. For more, see Pilot's video studies, “Pandora’s Black Box” and “Pentacon“, which offer additional substantiation.
And, indeed, Szymanki had it right. FAA Registration data shows that they were not officially reported to have been taken out of service until 28 September 2005, which is more than four years after they had “official” crashing in Shanksville (United Flight 93) and crashed into the South Tower (United Flight 175):
Notice the “Reason for Cancellation” in each case is simply “Cancelled”. No pretense that they might have been destroyed in crashes four years earlier. Just as we discovered in the case of the BTS data for American Flights 11 and 77, where replacement records were created to add those flights to the data based where they were previously missing, that form of documentary fakery was also perpetrated in the case of the FAA Registration records, where both of the planes that were associated with those flights also appear, but with deregistration dates of 14 January 2002 and the purported “Reason for Cancellation” in their case of “Destroyed”:
As we found in the case of AA Flight 11 at the North Tower and AA Flight 77 at the Pentagon, the on-site evidence does not confirm that United Flight 93 actually crashed in Shanksville or that United Flight 175 hit the South Tower, which, as we are going to discover, is far and way the most interesting of the forms of fakery surrounding the planes that are supposed to have been “hijacked” on 9/11.
Pilots for 9/11 Truth Corroboration
Indeed, the evidence that United Flight 93 did not crash in Shanksville and that United Flight 175 did not hit the South Tower has been considerably strengthened by new discoveries from Pilots for 9/11 Truth. By means of meticulous research on electronic communications between those aircraft and air traffic controllers, they have been able to establish that United Flight 93 was in the air in the vicinity of Fort Wayne, IN, and Champaign, IL, at the time of the alleged Shanksville crash. Since no aircraft can be in two places at one time, it is difficult to imagine more conclusive proof that the Shanksville crash of Flight 93 was another fabricated event:
Even more surprisingly, however, Pilots has also determined that United Flight 175 was in the air in the vicinity of Harrisburg and Pittsburgh, PA, at the time it was purportedly crashing into the South Tower in New York City. This may come as quite a shock to those who watched as it entered the South Tower on television. Indeed, when an FBI official was asked why the NTSB, for the first time in its history, had not investigated any of these four crashes, he replied that it wasn’t necessary “because we saw them on television”. Well, we didn’t see the Shanksville crash or the Pentagon crash on TV, which leaves us wondering what we did see on television on 9/11.
Flight 93: On-Site Evidence
Just as America Airlines planes were supposed to be Boeing 767s, both of these United planes were supposed to be Boeing 757s. A Boeing 757 weighs about 100 tons with a wingspan of about 125′ and a tail that stands 44′ above the ground.
It would have been overwhelmingly larger than the trucks in this photograph, where the alleged crater from the crash was situated. Compare this crash site with those from bona fide crash sites to begin to appreciate the enormity of the deception involved. “This is the most errie thing”, the coroner observed at the scene. “I have not, to this day, seen a single drop of blood. Not a drop.”
FOX News reporter: It looks like there’s nothing there, except for a hole in the ground.
Photographer Chris Konicki: Ah, basically that’s right. The only thing you can see from where we where, ah, was a big gouge in the earth and some broken trees. We could see some people working, walking around in the area, but from where we could see it, there wasn’t much left.
Reporter: Any large pieces of debris at all?
Konicki: Na, there was nothing, nothing that you could distinguish that a plane had crashed there.
Reporter: Smoke? Fire?
Konicki: Nothing. It was absolutely quite. It was, uh, actually very quiet. Um, nothing going on down there. No smoke. No fire. Just a couple of people walking around. They looked like part of the NTSB crew walking around, looking at the pieces…” – FOX (09/11/01)
An alleged eyewitness, Val McClatchey, who resides less than two miles from the purported crash site, claims to have taken a photo showing a plume of smoke from the crash site. There are good reasons to suspect that her photo was faked, however, and that Ms. McClatchey has to have had reasons of her own for taking such a deceptive public stance.
The plume resembles those from detonation explosions more than it does fires from crash sites, for example, and estimates of the location of the plume from the location the photo was allegedly taken place it over a pond, which suggests that this is yet another fake photograph in the 9/11 inventory. Indeed, there are many good reasons to suspect that 9/11 was staged with Hollywood-style special effects.
The virtually complete absence of any debris from the Shanksville “crash site” was explained on the basis of the claim that the ground had been used for mining in the past and was therefore “very soft”, where the plane simply disappeared into the ground. Some accounts even have it that the plane disappeared into an abandoned mind shaft. But we know what to do with miners trapped in mine shafts: we bring out the heavy equipment and the bright lights and dig 24/7 in the hope that, by some miracle, someone might have survived. But that was not done in Shanksville, where no effort was made to save anyone or even recover the bodies–and for good reason. There were none.
Flight 175: On-Site Evidence
The footage of the South Tower hit exemplifies several anomalies, including a Boeing 767 flying at an impossible speed, an impossible entry into the building (in violation of Newton’s laws), and even passing through its own length into the building in the same number of frames it passes through its own length in air—which is impossible, unless this 500,000 ton, steel and concrete building posed no more resistance to its trajectory in flight than air. Some have claimed that this was a “special plane” that could fly faster than a standard Boeing 767, but no real plane could violate Newton’s laws. The structure of the building, moreover, meant that it actually intersected with eight different floors as follows:
Each of those floors consisted of steel trusses connected at one end to the core columns and at the other to the steel support columns. They were filled with 4-8” of concrete (deeper in the v-shaped grooves) and posed enormous horizontal resistance. (Imagine what would happen to a plane encountering one of them suspended in space!) The windows were 18” wide and the support columns one meter apart, while there were no windows between floors, which means far less than 50% if the plane should have entered via them. But as Jack White has shown here, that is not what the videos display:
Notice that the plane completely enters the building before its jet fuel explodes, when one would have thought that, insofar as most of its fuel is stored in its wings, they should have exploded on entry—which is comparable to the failure of the 757 at the Pentagon to have its fuel explode when its wings hit those lampposts.
And while some have sought to support the claim that this was a real 767 based upon the engine found at Church & Murray, those who were fabricating evidence in this case did not get it right: the engine component did not come from a 767 and, if this FOX News footage is authentic, appears to be a plant, as another of Jack’s studies reveals:
Indeed, as John Lear, perhaps our nation’s most distinguished pilot, has observed, the plane in these videos does not even have strobe lights, which are required of every commercial carrier. But how can a Boeing 767 possibly travel at an impossible speed (as Pilots for 9/11 Truth has confirmed), enter a steel and concrete building in violation of Newton’s laws, pass through its own length into the building in the same number of frames that it passes through its own length in air, and not have its fuel explode as it makes contact with that massive edifice?
Even the frames from the Pentagon show a huge fireball upon impact. If that was true of the 757 there, why is it not also true of the 767 here? It looks as though, in this respect, the fabrication of Flight 77 fakery was just a bit better than the fabrication of Flight 175 fakery.
The Use of Video Fakery
Since we all saw United Flight 175 hit the South Tower on television–and many also claim to have watched it happen with their own eyes–what was actually going on in New York City? What did we see on television or, assuming we take the witnesses at face value, with their own eyes? There are three alternative theories, which involve the use of computer generated images (CGIs), the use of video compositing (VC), or the use of a sophisticated hologram, respectively.
That third alternative may sound “far out” until you realize that many witnesses claim to have seen a plane hit the South Tower with their own eyes, which would have been impossible if VC or CGIs had been the method that was used. Since we are dealing with visual phenomena, here are some videos that illustrate what I have been talking about in relation to “video fakery”:
“9/11 Fake: Media Make Believe”
The serious question that has to arise at this point, of course, is “Why?” Would it not have been far simpler just to fly a real plane into the North Tower and another into the South?Where the answer turns out to be, “No”. Pilots for 9/11 Truth discovered that it is extremely difficult to hit an edifice 208′ across at more than 500 mph. After 20 or more tried it repeatedly, only one was able to hit it once. In addition, a real plane could not enter all the way into the building before it would explode.
But that was a requirement of the mission, since otherwise there would have been no pseudo-explanation for the subsequent “collapse” of the buildings due to fire. And equally important, the explosions that were planned for the subbasements to drain the towers’ sprinkler systems of water so they could not extinguish the relatively modest fires that would remain after the pre-positioned jet fuel was consumed in those spectacular fireballs. The plan was to explain them away effects of jet fuel falling through the elevator shafts–a flawed theory, but good enough for a gullible public.
“The Theory of a Ghostplane”
“Proof Plane that Hit was Hologram”
The mission required something that looked like a real plane but could perform feats that no real plane could perform by entering the building before it would explode, which would have been impossible with a real plane. And that had to be timed to coincide with explosions in the subbasements that, even with the most meticulous planning, would inadvertently take place 14 and 17 seconds before the planes officially hit the buildings. It was an audacious plan, brilliant in design, and nearly perfect in execution. But those who were working this out did not realize that they were also creating the image of a plane that would turn out to be traveling faster than a Boeing 767, violating Newton’s laws, and passing through its own length into the building in the same number of frames it passed through its own length it air. As in the case of the Pentagon, they thereby violated laws of aerodynamics and of physics that gave their game away. And those blemishes, subtle as they may have been, have provided the opportunity to expose a fantastic fraud, which has been used to justify wars of aggression and constraints upon civil rights that our nation continues to endure to this day.
Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is the founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth and McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.
