News -n- Views

New article from Signs of the Times:

Evidence That a Frozen Fish Didn’t Impact the Pentagon on 9/11, and Neither Did a Boeing 757  by Joe Quinn

After the release of the QFG Pentagon Strike Flash Animation on August 23rd, 2004, a veritable onslaught of new articles were published that sought to dismiss the “no plane at the Pentagon” theory. One such article, that is frequently referenced by certain ‘9/11 researchers’ was authored by a member of the forum at the “Above Top Secret” (ATS) website. Interestingly, the article was written just a few weeks after the release of the Pentagon Strike Flash animation, which by then, was winging its way around the world and into the inboxes of millions of ordinary citizens. Perhaps you were one of them…

The claim that promoters of the “no plane at the Pentagon” theory were doing immense damage to the truth/accountability movement was raised in Mike Ruppert’s book Crossing the Rubicon. In a stunning piece of warped logic, Ruppert claimed that, while he is quite convinced that it was not Flight 77 that hit the Pentagon, he chose not to talk about or deal with the subject as part of his overall case for conspiracy because of the “implications”. According to Ruppert, the “implications” are that anyone that suggests that Flight 77 did not hit the Pentagon, is then forced to answer the question as to what actually happened to Flight 77. If that’s the case, then we better just wrap up the whole 9/11 Truth Movement and go home and have a beer.

Ruppert balks at the idea of offering an answer to this question to his readers because, he claims, most people would be unable to accept it, and, he suggests, 9/11 researchers serve only to alienate the public support that they wish to attract by stretching the boundaries of the collective belief system. What Ruppert doesn’t explain is why any member of the public would happily accept that U.S. government officials participated in the slaughter of the passengers on Flights 11 and 175 and the occupants of the WTC towers (as he details in his book) yet would be unable to accept the idea that the same government officials played a part in disposing of the passengers of Flight 77 in a much less imaginative way. Let’s be honest here, in the context of 9/11 being the work of a faction of the US government and military, the answer to the question as to what happened to Flight 77 if it didn’t hit the Pentagon is quite obvious - Flight 77 and its occupants were flown to a specific destination and ﾓdisposed ofﾔ by the conspirators. That’s pretty simple; cut and dried; no need for much stretching there! But, for some reason, Ruppert (and others affected by this paramoralism) seems to think that killing thousands of citizens by crashing airplanes is easier to accept than cold bloodedly murdering them “in person,” as it were.

Since Ruppert’s declaration about the “no plane at the Pentagon” theory, many other “9/11 researchers”, such as Mark Rabinowitz and Jim Hoffman, have seized upon Ruppert’s idea and even expanded upon it by suggesting that the “no planers” are actually government agents trying to discredit the REAL 9/11 researchers with the ‘kooky’ “no plane” theory.

In order to really understand the insidiousness of this patronising claim that the public could not accept the implications of the idea that a Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon, let’s look at the “evidence” as presented by the ATS member that it really was Flight 77 that impacted the Pentagon that bright September morn.

First, however, I would like to make a few observations about 9/11 research in general.

Anyone who takes on the formidable task of digging into the events of 9/11 is immediately at a disadvantage because the US government has already declared the case closed. The government knows how it happened and who did it and have informed the entire world. As a result, there is no possibility of access to the raw data, to the crime scene or analyses of same. Here is where we meet the major obstacle: since the US government is the prime suspect, we cannot simply take as truth everything - or anything - that they say in relation to the case.

Investigation of the 9/11 attacks should be approached like any murder investigation. When confronted with a murder case (like 9/11) and a suspect that has a history of deceit and murder (like the US government and its agencies) and who had an opportunity and a motive to commit the murder, do you take as fact any claims by the suspect that he did not commit the murder? Do you seek to fit the facts around his claim that he did not commit the murder? When you confront evidence that suggests that the suspect is lying about his account of where he was and what he was doing, or you find inconsistencies and logistically impossible scenarios in his account, do you ignore these and focus only on the fact that he said he did not commit the murder and try to find and present evidence that backs up his claim to innocence?

The fact is that researchers coming to the 9/11 investigation after the fact, and after the case has been officially closed, are not only confronted with the task of trying to find out what actually happened - they also face the already well established public belief, by which they themselves are also influenced, that the official story is the truth. The best approach for any 9/11 researcher with honest intentions is to, if possible, wipe from their minds the official version of events and take the attitude of someone who has just returned from a 5 year trip to the outer reaches of the solar system, during which time they had no communication with planet earth. Start with a beginner’s mind, turn off the sound of all the conflicting voices and their claims, and just LOOK at the evidence without prejudice.

Now, if the person with a truly open mind is given all of the publicly available evidence and has been additionally furnished with knowledge of the effects of airplane crashes and that of missile impacts, what would such a person conclude about the most likely cause of the Pentagon damage? Of course, not all of the evidence was made available to the public, but there is still sufficient visual evidence from “ground zero” (both in terms of place and TIME), to form a pretty good “best guess”. For a definitive conclusion to be reached, the “private” evidence, like the video tapes of the event that the FBI confiscated, would have to be released, and we don’t expect that to happen any time soon. Of course, the fact that the definitive evidence of the videos has not been released is in itself a key piece of evidence that suggests that the official story of what hit the Pentagon is not the real story.

The purpose of this small introduction is to prepare the reader for the fact that, in his attempted rebuttal of the no 757 at the Pentagon theory, the ATS article author, CatHerder, appears to have succumbed to the influence of the mainstream media shills that have incessantly parroted the official government story about what happened on 9/11 for the three years prior to the writing of the article. As such, he has failed to don the mantle of objective observer of the available evidence that is so crucial to finding the truth, and instead exerts a lot of effort to make the available evidence fit the government claim that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon on the morning of September 11th 2001. Either that, or he/she is part of the “official government cover-up.” After you read everything below, you can make a call on that one yourself.

Here is the ATS article as it appears on the ATS site with my comments interspersed in blue text.  [….]

For the rest of the article, go to Evidence That a Frozen Fish Didn’t Impact the Pentagon on 9/11, and Neither Did a Boeing 757.

911
Middle East
Foreign Policy
Patriot Act
News
Politics
News and politics
Weblogs
Weblog
Personal
Journal
Life
Current Affairs

By Joey Picador at JusticeForNone

One of our neighbors is moving. I’ve been in this neighborhood for about six years now, but didn’t really know them very well at all - just waves and nods, mostly.

So I heard the moving van pull up this morning. When I got home this evening I happened to spy my neighbor (he’s like 85 years old - I don’t know exactly, but he’s old, talks and moves very slowly) standing on the sidewalk next to the van. I walked over and shook his hand, and we started talking. I asked him where he was moving, and he said, “Back to Germany.”

I had been stationed in Germany for two years while in the military, so I lit up, and commented about how beautiful the country was, and inquired if he was going back because he missed it.

“No,” he answered me. “I’m going back because I’ve seen this before.” He then commenced to explain that when he was a kid, he watched with his family in fear as Hitler’s government committed atrocity after atrocity, and no one was willing to say anything. He said the news refused to question the government, and the ones who did were not in the newspaper business much longer. He said good neighbors, people he had known all his life, turned against his family and other Jews, grabbing on to the hate and superiority “as if they were starved for it” (his words).

He said he was too old to see it happen right in front of his eyes again, and too old to do anything about it, so he was taking his family back to Europe on Thursday where they would be safe from George W. Bush and his neocons. He seemed resolute, but troubled, nonetheless, as if being too young on one end and too old on the other to fight what he saw happening was wearing on him.

I gotta tell you - it was chilling. I let him talk, and the whole time, my gut was churning, like I had mutated butterflies in my stomach. When he was finished, he shook my hand, gripping it really hard, until his knuckles turned white and he was shaking. He looked me in the eyes, hard, and said, “I will pray for your family and your country.” He let go of my hand and hobbled away.

I have related this event to you in the hopes it will serve as a cautionary anecdote about the state of our Union, and to illustrate the path we Americans are being led down by a group of fanatics bent on global economic and military dominion. When a man who survived the fruits of fascism decides its time to leave THIS country because he’s seeing the same patterns that led to the Holocaust and other Nazi horrors beginning to form here, it is time for us to recognize the underlying evil inherent in the actions of those who claim they work for all Americans, and for all mankind. And it is incumbent upon all Americans, Red and Blue, Republican and Democrat, to stop them.

News
Politics
News and politics
Middle East
Foreign Policy
Weblogs
Weblog
Personal
Journal
Life

The Guardian reported the following yesterday. Odd how a little cloud got the President rushing to safety in a bunker, while on 911, when one would have thought he would have felt in considerably more danger, he was calmly sitting in front of a group of gradeschoolers.

Interesting, that.

Incoming cloud forces Bush into safe bunker

Julian Borger in Washington
Friday April 29, 2005
The Guardian

President George Bush was bundled into an underground bunker, Dick Cheney was evacuated to an “undisclosed location” and heavily armed secret servicemen took up defensive positions when a fast-moving cloud scudded towards the White House, it was reported yesterday.

The cloud that materialised 30 miles south of Washington on Wednesday morning was so dense it triggered radar monitors on the Domestic Events Network, intended to prevent a repeat of the September 11 attacks.

As an anti-aircraft missile battery on the roof of a nearby building was raised to the fire position, a Black Hawk helicopter was scrambled to take a look, but saw nothing except some clouds, one of which turned out to be the suspected aggressor.

The customs and border protection agency did not return calls seeking comment yesterday, but a spokesman, Gary Bracken, told the Washington Post that a cloud was to blame. “It does happen,” he said. “We have to deal with weather anomalies showing up on the radar screen.”

Such false alarms are common, triggered by clouds, flocks of birds or private aircraft wandering off course, but the White House confirmed yesterday that this was not the first time since September 11 2001 that the president has taken refuge in the hi-tech bunker beneath the building, the Presidential Emergency Operations Centre.

It was not clear yesterday what it was about Wednesday morning’s cloud that created such havoc. It was moving at about the speed of a helicopter, disappearing and then appearing again on the radar screen, but the same could be said of many clouds.

The White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, said the president was in the bunker for only a short time - the all-clear was sounded about 20 minutes after the first alert. US officials claimed that the incident showed how smoothly the alert system was functioning.
By federal law since the September 11 attack, air passengers have to remain strapped in their seats within half an hour’s flight time of Washington. Private aircraft have also been stopped using the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, just across the Potomac river from the Capitol building and the White House, although that ban is expected to be lifted soon.

The Signs of the Times had an interesting comment on this report, relating it to possible UFOs:

Comment: Apart from the pathetic image of macho Bush and Cheney fleeing to a bunker at the approach of a cloud, we note the marked difference in protocol from that which was observed on the morning of September 11th 2001. On that particular day, when the US was clearly being attacked by sources unknown, and it was certainly possible that the life of the President was in danger, Bush was allowed to remain exposed for at least 20 minutes as he sat reading to children at a school in Florida. Why was there no immediate “whisking away” at the first sign of danger then? Is it possible that Bush’s handlers were well aware of the nature of the threat and knew that there was no plan to “take out” the President?

And what type of threat might there be hidden in a cloud? The following is a report on a UFO sighting:

“On many occasions, UFOs are reported to become gradually engulfed in a vapor cloud. The fully developed cloud then looks like any other cloud in the sky and affords the UFO a very convenient “hiding place.”

“The series of photos made by the army private shows not only the rare ring object, but also shows it gradually becoming engulfed in a vapor cloud.”

Could this be what the White House was really upset about?

Foreign Policy
News
Politics
News and politics
Articles
911

I came across a weblog entry today regarding the demonstrations in front of the Supreme Court which I would like to include here.

It reads:

Commandments Debate Prompts Demonstrations

The Associated Press reported today via Yahoo News that demonstrators were protesting Wednesday in front of the Supreme Court. Quoting from that article:

“Shouts of “Amen” and a response of “hypocrites” pierced the chill air Wednesday as demonstrators protested in front of the Supreme Court while inside justices considered cases involving displays of the Ten Commandments on government property. ” [….]

[….] “The cases before the court centered on whether a 6-foot-tall monument of the Ten Commandments in Texas should be allowed to remain on Capitol grounds and a copy of the Commandments can stay posted in a courthouse in Kentucky. ” [….]

Towards the end of the piece, the author writes:

[….] “Christan Stapleton, 13, of Newland, N.C. carried a homemade, cardboard Ten Commandments tablet. She came to the Supreme Court with her church and family members.

‘We do need them in our school,’ she said, ‘to help us know what to do, what God wants us to do as we go through our day.’ ” [….]

“What God wants us to do” ??

How about: THINK FOR YOURSELVES, rather than expecting someone else to do it for you?

How about: stop your government from going into foreign countries and murdering the citizens of said countries - all in the “name of God”, in the name of “democracy”, in the name of “freedom”, in YOUR name?

How about: WAKING UP and smelling the flipping coffee, for Pete’s sake?

How’s that for starters?

News
Politics
News and politics

This is a test post.