Crooked Cops and 9-11
Every defendant in a criminal trial tries to argue that he was framed. On the other hand, anyone who's watched a tv detective show knows that crooked police officers do sometimes plant false evidence in order to frame an innocent person for the crime (and see this video).
If a detective is any good, he will take a look at whether the evidence was planted or real. While he won't accept the defendant's word at face value, he will discard any evidence which was obviously planted. If he determines that evidence is planted, he will ask the follow up questions of who planted the evidence and why. His investigative instincts and street smarts will also lead him to ask whether the person who planted the evidence was the real criminal -- because the real perpetrator of the crime often has the biggest motivation to frame someone else.
Are you with me so far? Do you agree?
OK, let's turn to September 11, 2001. Believe it or not, the top expert on Osama Bin Laden has said that Bin Laden's "confession" is fake.
And the flight manuals and other evidence supposedly "accidentally" left behind by the terrorists were in fact planted. For example, the Pulitzer prize-winning reporter who uncovered the Iraq prison torture scandal and the My Lai massacre in Vietnam wrote:
"Many of the investigators believe that some of the initial clues that were uncovered about the terrorists' identities and preparations, such as flight manuals, were meant to be found. A former high-level intelligence official told me, 'Whatever trail was left was left deliberately -- for the F.B.I. to chase'".
Additionally, at least 7 of the alleged 9/11 hijackers are still alive (see also this BBC article). However, the FBI apparently continues to this day to stick to its list of 19 hijackers. If identifying the names and identities of the hijackers were of real concern to the government (instead of framing a bunch of patsies), why wouldn't the government have modified the list after discovering that they had mistaken identities for at least 7 of the hijackers?
And imagine if a piece of evidence could not be authenticated according to basic science. For example, let's say an apparent confession note was found at an arson crime scene where the entire building had been turned to fine ash particles and nothing else survived. That would raise suspicions, right?
Well, a passport from one of the alleged hijackers was "found" a couple of blocks from the Twin Towers. And yet the government claims that the areas inside the Twin Towers where planes crashed were infernos so hot that they caused the collapse of the massive steel cores in the center of the towers. Indeed, the passport-owner's hijacked plane was allegedly almost completely lodged in the building's core. How could the passport have survived and ended up a couple of blocks away?
It is thus clear that evidence was planted to frame the hijackers on 9/11. Even a simple tv detective would ask who had the opportunity and motive to frame these patsies. He would also ask whether the persons who planted the evidence were the real culprits.
Perjury, Destruction of Evidence and Cover-Up
Everyone knows that when a witness is caught lying or changing his testimony, it effectively discredits him. If the witness is himself the accused criminal, then perjury, inconsistent testimony or destroying evidence tends to implicate the defendant's guilt.
Well, even the 9/11 Commission now states that Norad intentionally lied about what happened on 9/11. Indeed, Norad has given 3 separate, inconsistent versions of what happened that terrible day.
And Vice President Cheney changed his testimony and lied by stating that he did not enter the Presidential Emergency Operations Center until around 20 minutes after the Pentagon strike. In other words, Cheney changed his testimony in order to avoid damaging evidence.
And the government destroyed evidence and then completely covered up what happened on 9/11.
And what if a Defendant threatened important witnesses against him? Wouldn't that be a hint that the Defendant might be guilty? Well, the government has used frivolous arguments to silence a 9/11 whistleblower. Indeed, due to the government's efforts to silence her, she has become "the most gagged person in history".
Is that how an innocent party acts?
Postscript: Hani Hanjour was supposedly the pilot of the plane which crashed into the Pentgagon. But Hanjour's "name was not on the American Airlines manifest for the flight because he may not have had a ticket." Not on the flight manifest? If he didn't have a ticket, how'd he get on the flight? Is it possible that he was not the pilot, but that his name was used for some reason of convenience? In fact, Hanjour was such a terrible pilot that some have argued he could not have physically performed the "fighther jet" like maneuvers of the plane which crashed into the Pentagon.
I am NOT saying that planes did not crash into the Twin Towers: they did. Instead, I am saying that the people who planted the phony evidence did not want any questions about who the hijackers really were, who let them in the country, who masterminded the attacks, who stood down our military so that fighter jets did not intercept the planes, who planned the attacks on the same day that 5 war games were being conducted by the U.S. military (including at least 1 "live-fly" exercise using real planes), and whether someone else brought down the world trade centers with controlled demolitions. See www.911Proof.com regarding all of these claims. I'm saying the planted evidence casts doubt on the entire official story.
And falsifying and destroying the actual, existing evidence further reinforces the implication of guilt.
If a detective is any good, he will take a look at whether the evidence was planted or real. While he won't accept the defendant's word at face value, he will discard any evidence which was obviously planted. If he determines that evidence is planted, he will ask the follow up questions of who planted the evidence and why. His investigative instincts and street smarts will also lead him to ask whether the person who planted the evidence was the real criminal -- because the real perpetrator of the crime often has the biggest motivation to frame someone else.
Are you with me so far? Do you agree?
OK, let's turn to September 11, 2001. Believe it or not, the top expert on Osama Bin Laden has said that Bin Laden's "confession" is fake.
And the flight manuals and other evidence supposedly "accidentally" left behind by the terrorists were in fact planted. For example, the Pulitzer prize-winning reporter who uncovered the Iraq prison torture scandal and the My Lai massacre in Vietnam wrote:
"Many of the investigators believe that some of the initial clues that were uncovered about the terrorists' identities and preparations, such as flight manuals, were meant to be found. A former high-level intelligence official told me, 'Whatever trail was left was left deliberately -- for the F.B.I. to chase'".
Additionally, at least 7 of the alleged 9/11 hijackers are still alive (see also this BBC article). However, the FBI apparently continues to this day to stick to its list of 19 hijackers. If identifying the names and identities of the hijackers were of real concern to the government (instead of framing a bunch of patsies), why wouldn't the government have modified the list after discovering that they had mistaken identities for at least 7 of the hijackers?
And imagine if a piece of evidence could not be authenticated according to basic science. For example, let's say an apparent confession note was found at an arson crime scene where the entire building had been turned to fine ash particles and nothing else survived. That would raise suspicions, right?
Well, a passport from one of the alleged hijackers was "found" a couple of blocks from the Twin Towers. And yet the government claims that the areas inside the Twin Towers where planes crashed were infernos so hot that they caused the collapse of the massive steel cores in the center of the towers. Indeed, the passport-owner's hijacked plane was allegedly almost completely lodged in the building's core. How could the passport have survived and ended up a couple of blocks away?
It is thus clear that evidence was planted to frame the hijackers on 9/11. Even a simple tv detective would ask who had the opportunity and motive to frame these patsies. He would also ask whether the persons who planted the evidence were the real culprits.
Perjury, Destruction of Evidence and Cover-Up
Everyone knows that when a witness is caught lying or changing his testimony, it effectively discredits him. If the witness is himself the accused criminal, then perjury, inconsistent testimony or destroying evidence tends to implicate the defendant's guilt.
Well, even the 9/11 Commission now states that Norad intentionally lied about what happened on 9/11. Indeed, Norad has given 3 separate, inconsistent versions of what happened that terrible day.
And Vice President Cheney changed his testimony and lied by stating that he did not enter the Presidential Emergency Operations Center until around 20 minutes after the Pentagon strike. In other words, Cheney changed his testimony in order to avoid damaging evidence.
And the government destroyed evidence and then completely covered up what happened on 9/11.
And what if a Defendant threatened important witnesses against him? Wouldn't that be a hint that the Defendant might be guilty? Well, the government has used frivolous arguments to silence a 9/11 whistleblower. Indeed, due to the government's efforts to silence her, she has become "the most gagged person in history".
Is that how an innocent party acts?
Postscript: Hani Hanjour was supposedly the pilot of the plane which crashed into the Pentgagon. But Hanjour's "name was not on the American Airlines manifest for the flight because he may not have had a ticket." Not on the flight manifest? If he didn't have a ticket, how'd he get on the flight? Is it possible that he was not the pilot, but that his name was used for some reason of convenience? In fact, Hanjour was such a terrible pilot that some have argued he could not have physically performed the "fighther jet" like maneuvers of the plane which crashed into the Pentagon.
I am NOT saying that planes did not crash into the Twin Towers: they did. Instead, I am saying that the people who planted the phony evidence did not want any questions about who the hijackers really were, who let them in the country, who masterminded the attacks, who stood down our military so that fighter jets did not intercept the planes, who planned the attacks on the same day that 5 war games were being conducted by the U.S. military (including at least 1 "live-fly" exercise using real planes), and whether someone else brought down the world trade centers with controlled demolitions. See www.911Proof.com regarding all of these claims. I'm saying the planted evidence casts doubt on the entire official story.
And falsifying and destroying the actual, existing evidence further reinforces the implication of guilt.
7 Comments:
The government's biggest ally in this cover up scam is the public's apparent inability to see glaring flaws in their story, as well as their intricate and highly successful media management campaign.
See James Bamford's Rolling Stone article this month ("The Man Who Sold the War") on John Rendon, it's tremendously enlightening:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/_/id/8798997
This issue goes much deeper than 9/11. It was just that the events on 9/11 made it all glaringly obvious to any person who does not wish to trust their government. Yes, the American Government was guilty in this attack. So was every other Government in "civilized society". I have no reason to doubt that those in power had help from all of the Middle East countries, Britain, France, etc. America holds a great deal of power worldwide. If those in power (they who are served by George Bush as a puppet) decide that they want to change something worldwide, they will use any resource available to them to make that change. This time they miscalculated slightly. Bush was not a popular president and he was easily cast as the bad guy. That does make a war harder to fight. They didn't try hard enough to cover up the connections between the White House and the groups they were trying to lay the blame on. All the same, we are powerless to do anything about it. After all, what would you suggest? Civil war? No one wants a war in their own backyard. If you were to attempt it, the freedoms that Americans have given up would stop it from succeeding. Non-agressive forms of protest will not succeed without sufficient money behind it. Those who have the money will not invest against the powers that be. They tend to be on the same side. The average American citizen has no real power and hasn't had real power for a very long time. The public wishes to see peace in their own backyard. Too many of us are willing to give up privacy rights for feeling secure. The success of the Patriot Act shows that. We are no more secure in reality today than we were pre-9/11, but we are definately less free. That gives many a false feeling of security.
Few people seem to have noticed that TWO of the hijackers passports were said to have been found in the WTC rubble. First, they announced that they had Atta's, then in late Jan '04 they announced that they had also had Satam al-Sugami's.
Wow, George Washington, thanks for the link to Seymour Hersh's article. I had never read it. Next time someone calls me a "conspiracy theorist," I'll just cite the C.I.A. official in this article that says:
"This guy sits in a cave in Afghanistan and he's running this operation?" one C.I.A. official asked. "It's so huge. He couldn't have done it alone."
The biggest problem with all this is that so many americans can have the evidence right in front of their faces and choose to deny it. Most people dont want to believe it, i mean who would, your own government killing it's own people to gain greater control over them. Oh and lets not forget MONEY! But the fact is we have to believe it. If we are to survive as a free nation then the common man ( thanks commonman) does have to rise up and unite. Look at the power we as a people had after this first occurred. if it was terr orists who did this do you think that they would have wanted to attack us again? and bear the wrath of the power of our people? But now look at us, we have even as a society accepted no longer chasing the supposed mastermind( who cannot be found even though he is older than my grandpa and needs dialysis). We also have allowed an administration to pull the wool over our heads by pushing issue that make them look good to the christians and anyone respectful citizen. Issues like abortion,family values, and instituting a national day of prayer. The Christian right wing has been blindfolded and brainwashed.i strongly urge them to look at all the facts.And then to pray. In fact one of the comments said we are powerless to do anything. I KNOW THAT IS WRONG. As the commonman said there is power in unity and the first thing we can do is pass this information on to everyone you can. Tell all your friends, family, coworkers, basically anyone who will listen. The other thing you can do is pray. If believe in any kind of higher power than you have faith that it wouldnt want this to be allowed to go unnoticed. And last, my fellow americans who love their freedom, WE MUST BE READY. Ready to stand up for what you believe in and to fight for it when the time is right.
I agree, we must spread the word and pray that the Lord will Himself by His power and might, expose these wicked people and cut them off in their wickedness.
Psalm 94 is a prayer I pray often and believe the Lord will sometime soon show Himself and deal with these workers of darkness.
Evil can never prevail long when truth is in it's pursuit and shines it's light upon it.
George Bush is a traitor and ought to be punished to the fullest exent of our laws as one.
His days are coming to an end according to the Word of God!
You 9-11 conspiracy people are a pathetic bunch, but thank God you can write whatever you wish-your own opinions without fear of reprisal from your own government. Unlike that of Iraq, where one could never utter a word against their own government without fear of death to them AND their entire family, before the fall of Sadam Hussein. Remember folks, THAT is what our troops are fighting and losing life and limb for-YOUR FREEDOM! Does it really serve to unite or divide these great United States with these "theories"? Anyone who actually believes our elected officials are responsible for such carnage, and not the terrorists who have claimed responsibility, should perhaps take a deep breath, clear their hearts of partisan hatred, and perhaps their vision will be much clearer.
Post a Comment
<< Home