by Len Hart, The Existentialist CowboyThere is probable cause to indict and charge top officials, George W. Bush himself, for the crimes we call '911'. Just as Rome sacked Dacia for its gold, Bush, Cheney and a gang of NEOCON crooks around him conspired to attack and invade Iraq for its oil! As Hitler needed a Reichstag Fire, Bushco needed a pretext --a 'catalyzing event' that the Project for the New American Century would compare to Pearl Harbor. [See Rebuilding America's Defenses] Bush conspired with 'rich men' --his base --in order to perpetrate the capital crimes of aggressive war, mass murder and high treason!
In the second week of Bush's illegal occupancy of the White House, Dick Cheney's 'Energy Task Force' met to carve up the oil fields of Iraq. The stated objective was to "develop a national energy policy designed to help the private sector, state and local governments, promote dependable, affordable, and environmentally sound production and distribution of energy for the future." Fancy words for 'oil theft' on a scale not imagined since Rome and, later, the Third Reich....
May 25-26, 2009 -- Active and retired top military brass met to discuss what really happened on 9/11
WMR has learned from a well-informed source that in the months after the 9/11 attacks, a group of retired and active duty military officers, with ranks as high as general, met in an informal and hush-hush working group to discuss what actually occurred on September 11, 2001. WMR has been told that those who met did not believe, in whole or in part, the official line that nineteen Arabs nationals armed with box cutters hijacked four U.S. passenger planes and flew three of them into the World Trade Center and Pentagon.
The officers included veterans of Marine Corps Special Operations.
The officers concluded that it was impossible for the military's command and control, intelligence, and other defense systems to cascade in a total failure on the morning of September 11. They quietly set out to find out what actually occurred that morning and who or what influenced the total failure of defense, intelligence, and air traffic control systems.
The officers were forced to hold their meetings in secret because of retaliation brought against those who revealed information embarrassing to the Bush administration about both 9/11 and the concocted war against Iraq.
It is now being reported that investigators for the 9/11 Commission drafted a memo in April 2004 stating they believed that the North American Air Defense Command (NORAD) and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) lied to commission investigators by indicating the military's readiness was sufficient on 9/11. Commission staffer John Azzerello is reported to have given the memo to Commission Executive Director Philip Zelikow, a leading neocon, who then "buried it." Commission investigators wanted a strongly-worded criminal referral on NORAD and FAA perjury sent to the Justice Department but Zelikow downplayed the complaint and later told Phil Shenon, the author of "The Commission" and New York Times reporter, that he did not know of the criminal referral issue at the time.
The 9/11 Commission documents about the perjury of NORAD and FAA officials corroborates the concerns expressed by the retired military officers about the true version of events on 9/11.
Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group, obtained a batch of task force-related Commerce Department papers that included a detailed map of Iraq's oil fields, terminals and pipelines as well as a list entitled "Foreign Suitors of Iraqi Oilfield Contracts."The papers also included a detailed map of oil fields and pipelines in Saudi Arabia and in the United Arab Emirates and a list of oil and gas development projects in those two countries.The papers were dated early March 2001, about two months before the Cheney energy task force completed and announced its report on the administration's energy needs and future energy agenda.Judicial Watch obtained the papers as part of a lawsuit by it and the Sierra Club to open to the public information used by the task force in developing President Bush's energy plan.Tom Fitton, the group's president, said he had no way to guess what interest the task force had in the information, but "it shows why it is important that we learn what was going on in the task force."Opponents of the war are going to point to the documents as evidence that oil was on the minds of the Bush administration in the run-up to the war in Iraq," said Fitton. "Supporters will say they were only evaluating oil reserves in the Mideast, and the likelihood of future oil production."The task force report was released in May 2001. In it, a chapter titled "Strengthening Global Alliances" calls the Middle East "central to world oil security" and urges support for initiatives by the region's oil producers to open their energy sectors to foreign investment. The chapter does not mention Iraq, which has the world's second largest oil reserves after Saudi Arabia.-- H. Josef Hebert, Associated Press, Cheney Task Force Eyed on Iraq OilThe 'oil fields' of Iraq were 'carved up' long before Bush would have the 'pretext' needed to attack, invade, and divide the spoils of war. I propose that Bush be allowed to refute that charge at a trial in which he is charged with numerous crimes including mass murder, high treason, aggressive war and common theft! The 'official conspiracy theory of 911' does not help his case. Nothing Bush has said about 911 is true and he has actively sought to block every effort to learn the truth. None of the so-called 19 'Arabs' could compentently pilot aircraft of any type. None of them could have pulled off the crime of 911. Some of them --said to have been killed on 911 --survived to grant interviews with the BBC.
911 was an inside job, Bush's 'Reichstag Fire'. The Nazis had gone back to the well.
There is historical precedent for Dick Cheney's meeting with Bush's financial support. A good description of that precedent is found in the work of St. Thomas More who wrote of what he called a 'conspiracy of rich men', a conspiracy which presaged Hitler's infamous meeting in which he 'closed' a deal with I.G. Farben, Thyssen, Krupp et al. Hitler would wage wars from which his sponsors would benefit but only if they would 'pony up', if they would finance and support his rise to dictatorship.
For the first time—in the last relatively free election Germany was to have—the Nazi Party now could employ all the vast resources of the government to win votes. Goebbels was jubilant. "Now it will be easy," he wrote in his diary on February 3, "to carry on the fight, for we can call on all the resources of the State. Radio and press are at our disposal. We shall stage a masterpiece of propaganda. [note: this is clearly a reference to a 'planned' Reichstag Fire, Hitler's' 911!] And this time, naturally, there is no lack of money."(2) The big businessmen, pleased with the new government that was going to put the organized workers in their place and leave management to run its business as it wished, were asked to cough up. This they agreed to do at a meeting on February 20 at Goering's Reichstag President's Palace, at which Dr. Schacht acted as host and Goering and Hitler laid down the line to a couple of dozen of Germany's leading magnates, including Krupp von Bohlen, who had become an enthusiastic Nazi overnight, Bosch and Schnitzler of I. G. Farben, and Voegler, head of the United Steel Works. The record of this secret meeting has been preserved. [the analogy is the infamous meeting of Dick Cheney's 'Energy Task Force'.]The FBI doesn't believe the 'official conspiracy theory' of 911. Why should you?
Hitler began a long speech with a sop to the industrialists. "Private enterprise," he said, "cannot be maintained in the age of democracy; it is conceivable only if the people have a sound idea of authority and personality ... All the worldly goods we possess we owe to the struggle of the chosen . . . We must not forget that all the benefits of culture must be introduced more or less with an iron fist." He promised the businessmen that he would "eliminate" the Marxists and restore the Wehrmacht (the latter was of special interest to such industries as Krupp, United Steel and I. G. Farben, which stood to gain the most from rearmament). "Now we stand before the last election," Hitler concluded, and he promised his listeners that "regardless of the outcome, there will be no retreat." If he did not win, he would stay in power "by other means . . . with other weapons." Goering, talking more to the immediate point, stressed the necessity of "financial sacrifices" which "surely would be much easier for industry to bear if it realized that the election of March fifth will surely be the last one for the next ten years, probably even for the next hundred years."All this was made clear enough to the assembled industrialists and they responded with enthusiasm to the promise of the end of the infernal elections, of democracy and disarmament. Krupp, the munitions king, who, according to Thyssen, had urged Hindenburg on January 29 not to appoint Hitler, jumped up and expressed to the Chancellor the "gratitude" of the businessmen "for having given us such a clear picture." Dr. Schacht then passed the hat. "I collected three million marks," he recalled at Nuremberg.(3)--William Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, The Nazification of Germany: 1933–34
The FBI has admitted, officially, that it cannot find any 'evidence' or documentation to support popular myths that some four airliners were hijacked by terrorists and used as weapons on 911. Moreover, the FBI itself admits that "... no records would have been generated responsive to plaintiffs request for documents." In other words, there is no official evidence to support Bush's lies about 911. Their investigation, says the FBI, was based upon the never questioned assumption that the said flights had been hijacked.
The Co-chairs of the 911 Commission don't believe the official theory; why should you?911 Commission co-chairs claim that they were misled, perhaps deliberately, by the Bush administration and Pentagon brass. Because 911 was an act of mass murder overtly covered up by the Bush administration, the many lies by Bush amount to more than mere obstructions of justice or cover ups. They amount to high treason --a mechanism by which this administration seized power unconstitutionally. Holes in Bush's theories are holes in Bush's theories. Lack of evidence in support of Bush does not refute his critics who point them out. Bush's many lies and overt efforts to obstruct justice, it is hoped, will bring about the 'controlled demolition' of this illegal and illegitimate regime.
Instead of making a big scene and dropping a bombshell so-to-speak, the commission ‘compromised’ and deferred to the justice department so that it could pursue criminal investigations.You can be sure of this: someone did pull off 911. The best suspects are Bush, his NEOCON co-conspirators, the leadership of the GOP, various Pentagon brass, and other complicit murderers inside the Axis of the Military/Industrial Complex and K-Street! This gang of crooks, liars and traitors are responsible for perpetrating the treasonous, murderous crime of 911. Bush is the primary suspect for several reasons:Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon’s initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.
Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said.9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon
As we are all well aware, criminal charges were never made and it looks like interest in pursuing ‘justice’ wasn’t a top priority for the Department of Justice.Liberals have been shouting the Bush Administration for some time now. In fact, the hatred for our administration is so strong that Republicans had to concoct rhetoric in order to deal with the anger. “BDS” short for Bush Derangement Syndrome is all that the GOP die-hards could come up with to combat the allegations of impropriety and lawlessness that best characterizes President Bush and his administration of bandits.The panel agreed to a compromise, turning over the allegations to the inspectors general for the Defense and Transportation departments, who can make criminal referrals if they believe they are warranted, officials said.
“We to this day don’t know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us,” said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. “It was just so far from the truth. . . . It’s one of those loose ends that never got tied.”
- Those who lie about crimes do so to cover up guilt. Bush has never told the truth about 911.
- Bush has not merely lied; he has actively, consistently and deliberately tried to cover up the crime of 911 with overt and identifiable instances of obstruction of justice, lies, and overt intimidation. This --I believe --is persuasive evidence of his guilt and/or complicity.
There is no evidence that Hani Hanjour was at any time on any flight connected with 911. The Washington Post reported than Hanjour was not on board Flight 77 because he did not have a ticket. [Washington Post, 9/16/01] It's hard to imagine Hanjour --a skinny 120 lbs --overpowering the crew, forcing his way on board armed only with a box cutter, forcing the hunky pilot and co-pilot out of the cockpit and not only flying the 200 ton airliner but maneauvering it in ways that experienced pilots say is simply impossible. This is not Alice in Wonderland and we are not required to believe six impossible things before losing our lunches. [apologies to Lewis Carroll]There is, in fact, no case against the 'alleged' 19 Arab Hijackers whatsoever. There is no probable cause to indict them! There is no admissible evidence. There was no case! There is no reason to believe the Bush cover story with respect to 911, Iraq, the nuclear threat, the raison d'etre for the illegal presence of the US in the Middle East. There is no defense against mass murder and war crimes charges against Bush, the government of the United States, the Pentagon brass and co-conspirators throughout K-Street and the Military/Industrial complex! Bush had method. He had at his disposal the US military and the intelligence apparatus of the CIA in order to 'pull off' 911. His 'old man' --Bush Sr --had been Director of the CIA and most certainly had 'connections', perhaps a constituency loyal to him and powerful elites to whom the senior Bush may still be beholden.Bush had motive. Bush and his co-conspirators benefited from 911. The Bush/GOP 'base' of exceedingly rich elites got even richer short selling airline stocks. A neocon base benefited in numerous ways but primarily the elevation of their radical politics to policy. The oil companies that made up Dick Cheney's 'Energy Task Force' may have benefited most of all. They had already carved up the oil fields of the Middle East.Bush had opportunity. Bushco, i.e, Bush, co-conspirators, complicit and material support, alone had the opportunity to order and 'supervise' 911 by way of co-conspirators Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld. That may be evidence enough to get you injected with a lethal cocktail for much less ambitious and malevolent crimes in the fascist, gulag state of Texas, a state in which corporations are paid by the state to kill people. Hitler would have been proud!
It's not enough that the Bush administration actively covered up evidence even as it sought to quash every investigation of 911, Bush and Condoleeza Rice would lie about the event after the fact. Specifically, both Bush and Condo stated that the crashing of airliners into buildings could not have been foreseen, were not foreseen. [Bush: No evidence that US could avoid 9/11] Bush lied! Condo lied! The administration had 'gamed' such a scenario. It was the basis for G8 summit security.
No other person or group had this kind of opportunity. No other person or group had the capability to 'pull off' the crime of 911. Only Bushco --that is, Bush, his co-conspirators, or material support --could have planned, supervised and executed 911. The belief that Bin Laden could have co-ordinated the attacks of 911 from inside a cave in Afghanistan is ludicrous. Only two types continue to advocate it: the guilty and the stupid!
Bush's opposition to the creation of the 911 Commission, his orders to destroy evidence at the Pentagon and at 'ground zero', his interference with the 911 Commission, his ongoing cover up are not the actions of an innocent man. Had Bush wanted the truth out, he would have supported a complete, fair, and impartial investigation. That was, of course, the last thing Bush wanted.
Those who assert must prove. Those who have asserted that an airliner struck the Pentagon have provided no evidence whatsoever! Rather, they have sought to withhold evidence, primarily hundreds of still photos and videos that might have cleared the whole thing up! The black-hearted liars who continue to espouse an absurd theory have no proof and no evidence in their support
Flight 77 could not have crashed into the Pentagon!
Here's what you need to know about the Pentagon.
- No wreckage traceable to a 757 was ever recovered.
- Only ONE engine rotor was recovered!
- A 757 has TWO such rotors and both are much, much larger than the single rotor that was found!
- A 757 would have left behind some 200 tons of debris unless the GOP has managed to repeal the laws of the conservation of matter and energy!
- Engine rotors are made of a Steel/Titanium alloy to withstand high temps INSIDE jet engines.
- If a 757 had struck the Pentagon, BOTH such rotors would have survived; EACH rotor is about twice the size (or more) of the single rotor found
With a wingspan of over 116 ft the Global Hawk would have had no problem clipping the four damaged pole, skimming just above the pristine lawn, crashing into a portion of the Pentagon that was undergoing extensive renovations at the time. At the very instant of the crash, Flight 77 as above it all at 273 feet. At any speed less than that of light, a single object may not occupy two places at the same time. Either Flight 77 struck the Pentagon or it was at an altitude of 273 feet, some 200 feet ABOVE the Pentagon, at the very instant of the crash, as official flight data indicates, or it was not! I believe the Flight Data. I do not believe the lying sack of shit who dared occupy the White House for four years.
A Global Hawk has only one engine rotor and it is of the size of the ONLY rotor to have been found in the Pentagon debris. Had a 757 crashed into the Pentagon TWO rotors each about three times that size would have been found. They were not!
One of the most damning critiques Bush's official theory comes from, Heather Thomas, author of Trophies: A Novel:
There was no fuselage at the Pentagon. There was none that you could check out. They said it vaporized, and yet they produced bodies saying that they didn't vaporize. You can vaporize a two-ton engine? --Author, TrophiesThomas is absolutely correct. It's hard to imagine fires hot enough to vaporize the hard steel engines of a 757. It is even harder to imagine corpses left behind in fires hot enough to 'vaporize' engine rotors made of titanium/steel alloy! In fact, a titanium/steel alloy is used for airliner engines precisely because it will not melt or --worse --completely vaporize in a kerosene fire.
Last time, I checked flight was still possible! If Bush were correct, it would not be! Jet engines of any sort would simply not work if the rotors in them melted at kerosene fire temperatures. If you can still buy a ticket at Newark and fly to Los Angeles, Bush is a liar. That I have done precisely that proves that Bush is a liar! And likewise --a large chunk of what we still call our government.
The Bushco cover is easily disproved with a single fact. In response to an FOIA request by a professional pilots association, Flight 77 could not possibly have crashed into the Pentagon. Flight 77 was at altitude of 273 feet within about a second or two of the so-called 'crash' into the Pentagon, perhaps at the very instant of the alleged 'crash'. That puts Flight 77 over 200 feet ABOVE the Pentagon within about half a second of the impact.
Now --if, indeed, any aircraft of any type struck the Pentagon, it was not Flight 77. The official data also means that 'alleged' witnesses could not possibly have seen a 757 crash into the Pentagon. It was --according to the data --on a trajectory that would have made it impossible to see from the witnesses' known position. Neither could Flight 77 have struck the 'light poles' enroute. It was too high and on the wrong trajectory. Secondly, from an altitude of 273 feet, Flight 77 had no chance of descending to within a foot of the Pentagon lawn and leveling within less than a second! The axis of Bush/Cheney/Neocon would have you believe absurdities, lies and nonsense.
Now --a missile might have taken a route that clipped the light poles enroute to the Pentagon.
The only scenario that fully explains the necessity of decontamination procedures is that of a military craft crashing into the Pentagon. It is my belief that that is what happened in fact. Don't try to tell me that such procedures are just routine. They were not routine in New York and were not carried out! Now --a technology called 'Global Hawk' may very well explain the seemingly inexplicable events of 911 and, at the same time, point an accusing finger.
The Global Hawk is operated by remote control. The US, in fact, outfitted an aircraft with Global Hawk technology and flew it --without a pilot --from California to Australia entirely by remote control. No Arab hijackers were required! The Global Hawk, moreover, would have had no problems with the maneuver credited to Hanjour but which experienced pilots say is impossible in a 757.
A Global Hawk has only one engine rotor and it is of the size of the ONLY rotor to have been found in the Pentagon debris. Had a 757 crashed into the Pentagon TWO rotors each about three times that size would have been found. They were not! And that's because a 757 DID NOT strike the Pentagon. The burden of proof is upon those who have asserted that an airliner struck the Pentagon. It is time for those who continue to make that assertion to prove it, or, at the very, very least support it with a scintilla of verifiable evidence. The black-hearted liars who continue to espouse that absurd theory have not only no proof but no evidence in their support.
With a wingspan of over 116 ft the Global Hawk would have had no problem clipping the four damaged pole, skimming just above the pristine lawn, crashing into a portion of the Pentagon that was undergoing extensive renovations at the time. At the very instant of the crash, Flight 77 was above it all at 273 feet. It could not have and did not strike the Pentagon and there was, in fact, no recovery of 757 wreckage at the Pentagon. I challenge Bush: explain that!!
Could Flight 77 have simply leveled off? Bluntly --no! Flight 77 had only a half second to two seconds in which to dive a couple of hundred feet and then level off thus accounting for both the light pole damage and the hit into the Pentagon. [Aerodynamics Simulation Software] Such a maneuver is outside manufacturers specifications, simply, impossible in that aircraft. Moreover, had that happened the 757 would not have been seen by the eyewitnesses who could ONLY have seen it on the other trajectory. Watch the vid.
Calum Douglas presents his investigation into the flight data recorder from Flight 77. the Indian YMCA in Fitzroy Square, London on 8th June 2007.
NTSB Flight Data: Official 'Explanation' of Flight 93 is a Criminal Fraud! According to official NTSB Flight Data, Flight 93 could not possibly have crashed in the field in PA. The flight data flatly contradicts Bush's official conspiracy theory of 911. Guess which one is lying!Simply --any theory that raises more questions than it explains may be discarded. A set of related facts are explained by 'theories' which must, of necessity, explain every relevant fact. Theories inconsistent with proven facts must be discarded as false. Bush's theory explains nothing and is inconsistent with established science. The Bush theory violates Occam's Razor by raising more problems than it can possibly explain. The towering 14th-century philosopher William of Occam put it this way: "Multiplicity ought not to be posited without necessity." William was telling us we should make no more assumptions than we really need to explain anything -- the simplest explanation is best. We call that idea Occam's Razor because it helps slice away the junk in our thinking.Still other problems are raised by ex post facto attempts to paper over the holes.
--Dr. John Lienhard, University of Houston's College of Engineering, The Engines of Our Ingenuity
Damien, a regular contributor to this blog, has put together an exhaustive survey of equally disturbing holes in the official theories concerning Flight 93 which we have been expected to believe crashed in PA. Following is Damien's report --a damning critique and proof that the Bush cabal cover stories about Flight 93 are simply impossible.
Following is Damien's report:
Lies about the Twin TowersEveryone in America should know that alleged 'plane crashes' into the Twin Towers could not and did not result in their collapses. Descriptions by numerous witnesses, including that of professional firefigters describe controlled demolitions and thermite/thermate fires which burned for weeks.
The evidence discrepancies from Flight 77 are echoed in the absurdities of Flight 93. This from Pilots for 911 Truth:1. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support observations.2. All Altitude data on the northern approach contradicts witnesses published by the New York Times.3. Witness observations of approach path contradict northern approach as described by Popular Mechanics and the US Govt. Several witnesses observed the aircraft approaching from southeast over Indian Lake and from the south prior to witnessing explosion. Parts found in New Baltimore, 8 miles southeast of crater is a direct contradiction to the northern approach claimed by the US Govt.4. Environmental Protection Agency reports no soil contamination of jet fuel after testing 5,000-6,000 yards of earth including 3 ground wells. Smoke plume photographed by a witness does not suggest a jet fuel rich explosion.5. Impact angle according to Flight Data Recorder does not support an almost vertical impact as the govt story and crater suggests.That's right, the flight data recorder has the plane impacting upside down at 40 degrees to the horizontal. You could google all day and never find an image showing where the huge tail hit the ground! You will only ever see vertical impact photos. The only photo shows a smoke plume more consistent with a smaller ordinance explosion. There are no heavy kerosene fumes filling the sky. According to FDR data there was 17.01 tons (5,500 gals) of fuel left at time of impact. Yet the EPA found no ground contamination from jet fuel. Unbelievable!"We (were) literally surrounded by debris, and there's a very strong odor of scorched earth," witness Jim Parsons reported. "It doesn't smell like jet fuel, it smells like ... How do you describe it? Burned earth. It smells like burned earth." - Pittsburgh Channel (09/11/01)The impact hole is 75' wide and the aircraft is 125' feet wide. (See also here)The volume of debris is too small. The only photos released by the authorities showing small debris. Multiple witnesses at the Shanksville site reported on the lack of debris. The FBI claims that it recovers 95 percent of the plane and sent it on to United Airlines. That would be about 60 tons of plane debris. I defy anyone to produce evidence that 60 tons of plane debris was taken from Shankesville or forwarded to UA. Lies!Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller reported that they had found "unspecified human remains and enough minuscule pieces of plane debris to fill one-third of a dumpster." That's right, 1/3 of a dumpster! This dumpster!The "recovered" remains, allegedly from Fl93, are anomalous and are suggestive of evidence tampering. -- A terrorist passport found in the streets of New York that "survived" the WTC attacks and a Koran and materials recovered from Mohammed Atta's car all appear to be staged evidence, as does the unmarked red bandana and terrorist driver's licence recovered at Shanksville. When 200 airline seats are totally destroyed you don't expect to find unmarked red bandanas and bibles!The human remains (600 lbs) does not compare with the passenger weights (4 tons). Modern, high temperature crematoria take 2 hours to burn bodies yet we are expected to believe that 4 tons of human remains disappeared ("vaporised") in an instant leaving only 150- 600lbs of tissue shreds. The temperatures were simply not high enough to dispose of that volume of human remains in such a small time frame. If the bodies burned above ground they would have left a recognizable offensive smell (burnt tissue like at a BBQ) that would have been noticed just like at other aircraft crash sites. Carbon based objects such as humans, luggage and seating require oxygen to burn. If they were burned above ground they would have produced larger amounts of smoke than was seen. Had they passed into the ground they would not have burned because there was no oxygen; they might have been shredded, but not consumed by fire. So if the seats burned above ground then 200 seat frames would be there somewhere. They're not. Instead, we have this.Officially, the largest piece found of Fl 93 was a seven-foot-long piece of the fuselage skin, including four windows. Given that the wings are 125' wide with a 40' high tail then that's a load of baloney right there!There is no verifiable evidence chain of custody on the debris, human remains or FDR.The FBI refused to allow either the FAA or NTSB carry out investigations required of them by law and which they had undertaken as standard procedure for ALL previous aircraft crashes occuring in the US over many decades. The FBI did NOT carry out any forensic evaluation of the crash nor permit anyone else to do so. That's a profoundly unprofessional course of action given that one caller from Fl 93 late in the flight said a bomb had possibly blown up in the plane.Neither the NTSB or the FAA handled the evidence, only the FBI. Isn’t that their job? -- yes it is, but they have no legal authority to prohibit, hinder or obstruct legally mandated inquiries by the FAA and the NTSB that should have taken place. They were forbidden from doing so. The FBI also had clear obligations in regard to the handling of evidence which they failed to fulfill. The usual investigative procedures in regard to flight crashes and the handling of evidence were not followed in regard to 911.Whatever happened at Shanksville, the official 911 account is baloney! In Aug 2006 a Russian plane, almost identical in size to Fl93, crashed in Siberia. They recovered 140 bodies and huge amounts a debris. But nothing like that at Shankesville. -- Damien
On videos, molten steel can be seen streaming down the outer walls. The relatively cool kerosene fires were already spent by this time and could not have melted steel in any case. In summary, the first reporters on the scene at both the Pentagon and the so-called 'crash site' in PA were correct. There was NO airliner debris at either location. The narrow ditch at PA could not have accommodated a 757 and, in fact, did not. The ditch was most probably created by the backhoe that was seen in the very earliest photos from the PA crash site. It is LUDICROUS to suppose that Flight 93 buried itself underground leaving mere scraps topside. [See: Hoodwinked at Shanksville]. If Flight 93 buried itself like a gopher, then let's excavate that site. Let us find out where all that missing debris is. If there is an airliner down there, let's dig it up. We have the technology to do it: backhoes and shovels. In the meantime, check out the how the Bush government's 'best case' for the Flight 93 scenario is proven to have been a cynical fraud.
The alleged 'plane crashes' into the Twin Towers could not and did not result in their collapses. Descriptions by numerous witnesses, including that of professional firefigters describe controlled demolitions and thermite/thermate fires which burned for weeks. Jet fuel fires are spent very quickly. Ordinary fires can be extinguished with sand by robbing the fire of oxygen, but if one covered a thermite fire with tons of sand, the fire would not stop. Certainly that was the case at WTC where the fires burned 'slowly and more moderately for weeks'. Jet fuel fires are spent very quickly. They do not continue to burn for weeks. On videos, molten steel can be seen streaming down the outer walls. The relatively cool kerosene fires were already spent by this time and could not have melted steel. The first reporters on the scene at both the Pentagon and the so-called 'crash site' in PA were correct. There was NO airliner debris at either location. The narrow ditch at PA could not have accommodated a 757 and, in fact, did not. The ditch was most probably created by the backhoe that was seen in the very earliest photos from the PA crash site.
It is LUDICROUS to suppose that Flight 93 buried itself underground leaving mere scraps topside. [See: Hoodwinked at Shanksville]. If Flight 93 buried itself like a gopher, then let's excavate that site and put the issue to rest once and for all!
Let us find out where all that missing debris is. If there is an airliner down there, let's dig it up. We have the technology to do it: backhoes and shovels. In the meantime, check out the how the Bush government's 'best case' for the Flight 93 scenario is proven to have been a cynical fraud. Why Silverstein Should be Indicted for MurderThere is no reason to suppose that anything supernatural happened at WTC 7; there is no reason to suppose that laws of physics discovered and described by William Thomson, 1st Baron Kelvin, Newton, Galileo et al were repealed. There is reason to suspect that something highly illegal happened at WTC 7. Persistent heat patterns, observed and photographed from space are big holes in Bush's official theory which cannot explain them innocently. If 'thermal expansion' is to be implicated, the source of additional heat --a violation of fundamental physics --must be demonstrated. An ex post facto cover story, like Arlen Spector's magic bullet theory, is not it. Anyone who has ever built a fire knows that fires run down, get cooler and eventually burn out. Left alone, fires never get hotter. Likewise, steel exposed to fire will only get cooler over time. The only thing that might have saved the sorry assess of the 911 liars is an non-existent exception to the laws of entropy.In thermodynamics, the concept of entropy is a measure of the amount of energy no longer capable of conversion into work after a transformation process has taken place. Things run down. Hot things get cooler. If the 'cool' kerosene fires were insufficient to melt steel, then the presence of melted steel must be explained in another manner. If the fires are now said to have gotten hotter, the additional energy must be explained rationally. Neither Bush nor his legion of paid 911 liars can change the laws of physics.The best explanation for the collapse of WTC 7 is still the simplest --Silverstein's simple statement that the building had been 'pulled' following his discussion and agreement with firefighters. Silverstein's own explanation --that the building was 'pulled' --explains everything while providing sufficient probable cause to bring mass murder charges against Silverstein.
['Probable Cause' is ] ...a reasonable belief that a person has committed a crime. The test the court of appeals employs to determine whether probable cause existed for purposes of arrest is whether facts and circumstances within the officer's knowledge are sufficient to warrant a prudent person to believe a suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. U.S. v. Puerta, 982 F.2d 1297, 1300 (9th Cir. 1992). In terms of seizure of items, probable cause merely requires that the facts available to the officer warrants a "man of reasonable caution" to conclude that certain items may be contraband or stolen property or useful as evidence of a crime. U.S. v. Dunn, 946 F.2d 615, 619 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. Denied, 112 S. Ct. 401 (1992).It is undisputed that the Fourth Amendment, applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, prohibits an officer from making an arrest without probable cause. McKenzie v. Lamb, 738 F.2d 1005, 1007 (9th Cir. 1984). Probable cause exists when "the facts and circumstances within the arresting officer's knowledge are sufficient to warrant a prudent person to believe that a suspect has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime." United States v. Hoyos, 892 F.2d 1387, 1392 (9th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, 489 U.S. 825 (1990) (citing United States v. Greene, 783 F.2d 1364, 1367 (9th Cir. 1986), cert. denied, 476 U.S. 1185 (1986)).When there are grounds for suspicion that a person has committed a crime or misdemeanor, and public justice and the good of the community require that the matter should be examined, there is said to be a probable cause for, making a charge against the accused, however malicious the intention of the accuser may have been. And probable cause will be presumed till the contrary appears.In an action, then, for a malicious prosecution, the plaintiff is bound to show total absence of probable cause, whether the original proceedings were civil or criminal. --Probable CauseSilverstein is on video tape confirming that within minutes of his discussion with firefighters, in which it was agreed that the building be pulled. The building would not be pulled, however, until two major news outlets reported the collapse but before it happened in fact. The collapse of WTC 7 looks like every other controlled demolition because that is precisely what it was.
To cover up the holes in officialdom, the NIST went back to the drawing board. They tried to explain the perfect, controlled demolition of WTC 7 with 'Thermal expansion'. Trouble is real 'thermal expansion' differs among various materials.
The 'thermal expansion' co-efficient of steel can be looked up on the internet for free! If you are willing to pay a small yearly subscription fee, you can plug that coefficient (for steel) into an 'online' calculator that will tell you precisely how much 'expansion' can be expected per degree of heat in various scales. The coefficients are one thing. Of more interest are the exponents which, as I recall, are always negative, as in negative 6. Any positive number to the power of negative six, for example, is very, very, very small. Any coefficient to a negative power is very, very, very small. Clearly --the Bush administration itself is aware that it is in deep, deep trouble.
...there is one group of people that has always taken the war crimes charges seriously--the members of the Bush administration themselves. They have good reason for doing so, because they have exposed hundreds of Americans to possible prosecution for violating US law.As long as George Bush is president and controls the Department of Justice, there will no prosecutions for war crimes, but after Bush is gone, anything could happen and hundreds of Americans could be charged with war crimes.--David Wallechinsky, Is George Bush Guilty of War Crimes...and Who Cares?Bush's exit from the Oval Office should have made him vulnerable to process for violations of the War Crimes Act of 1996 passed by both houses of Congress without dissent. What is wrong with this country that it simply will not prosecute anyone BUT the poor and disadvantaged. Why are so-called "Presidents" considered to be above the laws that apply to everyone else?
The act violated by Bush covers every crime that may be charged to Bush as of this moment and as of the time Bush will exit the 'cover' of the Oval Office. The act deals specifically with his deliberate "killing, torture or inhumane treatment" of 'detainees' at Abu Ghraib, GITMO and the gulag archipelago of 'detention centers' throughout Eastern Europe. Violations of the War Crimes Act that result in the death of a detainee carry the death penalty and there is no statute of limitations.
(a) Offense.— Whoever, whether inside or outside the United States, commits a war crime, in any of the circumstances described in subsection (b), shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for life or any term of years, or both, and if death results to the victim, shall also be subject to the penalty of death.Bush had been planning to commit capital crimes long before 911 and, in fact, tried to make 'legal' the crimes that he had intended to commit.--TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 118 > § 2441 § 2441. War crimes
Wishing to rebuke the unpunished war crimes of dictators like Saddam Hussein, in 1996 a Republican-dominated Congress passed the War Crimes Act without a dissenting vote. It defined a "war crime" as any "grave breach" of the Geneva Conventions. It thereby advanced a global trend of mutual reinforcement between national and international law.The War Crimes Act was little noticed until the disclosure of Alberto Gonzales's infamous 2002 "torture memo." Gonzales, then serving as presidential counsel, advised President Bush to declare that the Geneva Conventions did not apply to people the United States captured in Afghanistan. That, Gonzales wrote, "substantially reduced the threat of domestic criminal prosecution under the War Crimes Act." --The Nation, Bush Aims to Kill War Crimes ActBush did not succeed in putting himself above the laws that prescribed the death penalty for the very violations of laws that he had planned. Title 18 of the US Code as currently published by the US Government [as quoted above] reflects the laws passed by Congress as of Jan. 3, 2007, and it is this version that is published here.It was because Bush knew he was guilty that he tried to ram through Congress amendments to the War Crimes Act that would exonerate him EX POST FACTO. Ex post facto laws are unconstitutional. Bush defenders will waste their time trying to convince me that ex post facto prohibition applies only to those laws making one prosecutable for acts that were legal at the time of commission. In other words, if it was legal to spit on the sidewalk at the time you did so, you are immune to prosecution under any law passed after you had so spit!
Clearly --Bush can not commit murder now and expect to escape prosecution by making it legal after his crime of murder. Don't confuse this with amnesty, which, to my knowledge, Bush has not sought nor does he deserve. Rather, Bush has tried to rewrite both laws and history. He tried to make legal those capital crimes that he had already committed. It is absurd to excuse the crimes of mass murder and high treason with an ex post facto, unconstitutional act of congress.
Several yeas ago, I wrote an article that pointed out that any federal grand jury could indict Bush for capital crimes and, in fact, could begin an investigation of Bush upon its own volition. Any federal judge can, upon his/her own motion, convene a federal grand jury to consider any case deemed worthy of investigation. I would suggest that any Federal Judge reading this, get off your bench and convene a jury! It is your patriotic duty to this nation and its laws! Former LA Prosecutor Vince Bugliosi makes another case, that because Bush deliberately lied in order to send US soldiers to their deaths in an illegal war, Bush is prosecutable for murder.
In the first sentence, we're told:Because he has notoriety, Bugliosi has succeeded in attracting some attention to this issue. My fear is that in the post-election atmosphere of relief that Obama turned back the GOP wave the pressure to bring George W. Bush to justice will subside. That would be a grave mistake, a catastrophic precedent. If Bush is allowed to make good a get away, the signal will have been sent that US presidents are above the law and may perpetrate mass murder and war crimes at will. Violations of US Codes, Title 18, Section 2441 are NOT to be confused with violations of those international treaties which may have the effect of putting Bush in the dock at the Hague. Bush is a felon under US laws. Certainly, Bush had planned to commit acts that were known to be violations of US laws and our treaty commitments. Even before 911 provided Bush the pretext to attack and invade both Afghanistan and Iraq, Tom DeLay sponsored legislation that provided for a US military invasion of The Hague in those instances should Bush find himself in the dock for war crimes. The timing of the bill is material to the case against Bush but speaks to the fact that Bush had been planning to commit prosecutable war crimes and wished to immunize himself against prosecution for the acts that were known at the time to be violations of international laws to which the US was bound by treaty.There are yet other legal ghosts that will haunt Bush. He may be charged with perpetrating the crime of genocide.The book you are about to read deals with what I believe to be the most serious crime ever committed in American history - - the president of the nation, George W. Bush, knowingly and deliberately taking this country to war in Iraq under false presences, a war that condemned over 100,000 human beings, including 4,000 American soldiers, to horrific, violent deaths." (V. Bugliosi, p. 3)The president "knowingly and deliberately" caused the deaths of US soldiers and Iraqi civilians and that's called murder, plain and simple. This is not a hypothetical case that could happen under special legal interpretations. When the president leaves office, he is subject to the same law as the rest of us. Bugliosi explains the ability to prosecute the case against George W. Bush by a district attorney or states attorney in any local jurisdiction where a life was lost in the Iraq war. Federal prosecutors also have that option. Bugliosi's detailed analysis of this phenomenon offers some of the best analysis in the book and the detailed end notes.--E. Pluribus Media, Bugliosi's The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder
U.S. Code; Chapter 50A; Section § 1091. Genocide (a) Basic Offense. - Whoever, whether in time of peace or in time of war, in a circumstance described in subsection (d) and with the specificHat tip to: Above Top Secret The Congress did not have the stomach for impeachment and shirked it's duty --that of impeaching a 'President' that should have been impeached for his crimes against the Constitution. Following impeachment, he should have been indicted for his overt violations of US Codes, Title 18, Section 2441 --capital crimes! The denial of justice is injustice. The denial of justice for those who presume to rule is the deniable of justice and the rule of law to those who pay their taxes, foot the bill, indulge the crimes of terrorism, mass murder, and capital war crimes of those who presume to rule. The recent regime change is but marginally better! We needed a revolution but got a bandaid! Organize now to support the creation of a federal grand jury that will investigate and indict the previous administration and demand a their trials! Recently, Noam Chomsky opposed an independent investigation of 911. It didn't matter, he said. Interestingly, Chomsky does not contend that Bush or his administration is innocent of the crime of 911! Chomsky's position is that it just doesn't matter. My response is that if any murder matters, this one matters! If any MASS murder matters, this one matters. If the Reichstag Fire mattered, 911 matters. This is not only a moral or a philosophical issue, it's a legal one. If the 911 culprits are not investigated, charged, tried and sentenced, a horrible precedent will have been set. We will have said to government: "You are no longer responsible to the electorate and the people are no longer sovereign"! It follows inexorably and logically, that if the people are no longer sovereign, then the rest of the US Constitution is invalid. The Constitutional commentary of the venerable Joseph Story is absolutely correct that the Constitution --the Preamble specifically --established as a matter of law the sovereignty of the people themselves.
intent to destroy, in whole or in substantial part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such. (1) kills members of that group; (2) causes serious bodily injury to members of that group; (3) causes the permanent impairment of the mental faculties of members of the group through drugs, torture, or similar techniques; (4) subjects the group to conditions of life that are intended to cause the physical destruction of the group in whole or in part; (5) imposes measures intended to prevent births within the group; or (6) transfers by force children of the group to another group; or attempts to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b0. --US Codes; Chapter 50A, Section § 1091. Genocide
The preamble never can be resorted to, to enlarge the powers confided to the general government, or any of its departments. It cannot confer any power per se; it can never amount, by implication, to an enlargement of any power expressly given. It can never be the legitimate source of any implied power, when otherwise withdrawn from the constitution. Its true office is to expound the nature, and extent, and application of the powers actually conferred by the constitution, and not substantively to create themIt is the principle upon which everything else in the Constitution follows and is based. If the Constitution is 'invalid', then the United States government is illegitimate, the US is not a nation, no law is valid, no tax is just, no expenditure for public purposes is legal. That Bush sought to expand his power far beyond the express powers of the executive is an indisputable matter of fact and record. He could not have done so without 911! It matters!--Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States
How does a man of no charisma, little talent and less intelligence get himself into a position in which he rules the world? Typically it is always done the Adolph Hitler way --a phony terrorist attack, a homegrown version of the Reichstag Fire. In Bush's case 911! [See: Bush's Conspiracy to Create an American Police State: Part I, Police States Begin With False Flag Attacks note: if all you have to refute this is a stupid label that you picked up somewhere, spare me! I will delete it! This blog deals in verifiable facts and/or meaningful statements. Labels --the staple of right wing, pro-Bush propaganda gets trashed where it belongs! ] The next step is the subject of this article: the several prosecutions of George W. Bush in federal courts for mass murder and in world courts for war crimes, crimes against the peace and crimes against humanity.
Principle I Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment.Principle II The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law.Principle III The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible Government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.Principle IV The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.Principle VAny person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law.Principle VlThe crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under; international law:An October 2006 poll by New York Times and CBS News indicated that some 84 percent of Americans don't believe George W. Bush is telling the truth about what he knew prior to the attacks of 911. In the same year, Zogby reported that 45 percent of Americans support an investigation of George W. Bush by an International Tribunal. Such a tribunal should re-investigate whether officials of the US government allowed or consciously and deliberately helped or facilitated the attacks.In the same year, 911truth.org commissioned Zogby which found that about half the population of New York believes that members of the Bush administration 'knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act." 911 was, therefore, a deliberate act of mass murder perpetrated upon the American people by the man who presumes the office of 'dictator'. Since that is the title he prefers to 'president', then I suggest we stop calling him "President Bush'. He is merely Bush or, more properly, Mass Murderer Bush, if you must attach a title.Principle VII Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principles VI is a crime under international law.--Principles of the Nuremberg Tribunal
- Crimes against peace:
- Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
- Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
- War crimes:
Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave-labor or for any other purpose of civilian population of or in occupied territory, murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war, of persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.- Crimes against humanity:
Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.
The New American Century
Video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3776750618788792499&hl=en
This film is astonishing, it goes in detail through the untold history
of The Project for the New American Century with tons of archival
footage and connects it right into the present.
This film exposes how every major war in US history was based on a
complete fraud with video of insiders themselves admitting it.
This film shows how the first film theaters in the US were used over a
hundred years ago to broadcast propaganda to rile the American people
into the Spanish-American War.
This film shows the white papers of the oil company Unocal which called
for the creation of a pipeline through Afghanistan and how their exact
needs were fulfilled through the US invasion of Afghanistan.
This film shows how Halliburton under their “cost plus” exclusive
contract with the US Government went on a mad dash spending spree akin
to something out of the movie Brewster’s Millions,
yet instead of blowing $30 million they blew through BILLIONS by
literally burning millions of dollars worth of hundred thousand dollar
cars and trucks if they had so much as a flat tire.
I have seen a ton of films, this film contains a massive amount of
incredible footage I have never seen before anywhere, it is an
historical documentary which exposes all the lies of the past
so that you can understand the present. This film is a must see.
“A stunning film. It should be seen as widely as possible, in cinemas,
bars, clubs, at meetings and, of course, through the internet.
I’m sure the film will continue to be a source of debate and political
education for many years. Maybe until the war criminals have been
brought to trial.” - Ken Loach
“In the White House, they weren’t thinking of 9/11 as an attack, but as
a gift!” - Robert Steele, former CIA agent
While Massimo Mazzucco’s first political documentary, Global Deceit
(2006), focused on the long list of inconsistencies in the official
version of the 9/11 attacks, The New American Century explores the
historical, philosophical and economic background that suggests a matrix
for such events that is much closer to home than the so-called “Islamic
terrorism”.
The film provides solid evidence for the true reasons behind the
Afghanistan and Iraq wars, whose unfolding is described in chilling
detail in a document called
“Project for the New American Century”, published in the year 2,000,
that seems to have served as the actual blueprint for such dramatic events.
http://www.documentarywire.com/the-new-american-century
911: Atrocity, Mass Murder, High Treason!
Justice for 911 Perpetrators
Additional resources:
