|
|
1.
28th
February 2007. Formal letter of complaint to the BBC.
2.
2nd
March 2007. The BBC's reply, (and enclosing blog messages from Richard Porter and
Mike Rudin.)
3.
19th March 2007 - formal complaint to Ofcom
about BBC.
4.
20th March 2007 - formal complaint to Ofcom about BBC World
News program of 11th September 2001.
5.
22nd March 2007 - addendum to letter of 20th March 2007
sent to Ofcom.
6.
23rd
March 2007 - letter from Ofcom.
7.
26th
March 2007 - Formal letter of complaint to the BBC Governors.
8.
24th April
2007 - BBC's reply to letter to Governors of 26th March 2007.
9.
30th May 2007 - Formal letter of complaint to BBC
Editorial Complaints Unit.
10.
18th June 2007 - BBC reply from Editorial Complaints Unit
(9 pages).
11.
3rd August
2007 - BBC Trust reply.
12.
20th November 2007 - Letter to BBC Trust, Chairman,
Editorial Standards Committee.
13.
21st
November 2007 - Addendum to
Letter to BBC Trust, Chairman, Editorial Standards
Committee.
The following letter was sent to the BBC
by Recorded Delivery post:
BBC Complaints
PO Box 1922
Glasgow G2 3WT
28th February 2007
FORMAL
COMPLAINT
Re: BBC2 - The Conspiracy Files – 9/11. Panorama
9.0pm – 18th February 2007
Series Producer - The Conspiracy Files: Mike Rudin
Producer of The Conspiracy Files – 9/11: Guy Smith
Narator: Helen Boaden
Dear Sir or Madam,
Having viewed the
Panorama documentary above, I hereby register a formal complaint against the
BBC, the producers and narrator of said program for what was clearly and
deliberately a negative bias against the September 11th 2001
researchers, collectively known as the 9/11 truth seekers, or the 9/11 movement,
in the U.S.A., and by inference the 9/11 movement in the U.K., Europe and around
the world.
The documentary was
filled with negative psychological images and statements indicating the
producer’s deliberate intent from the outset to misrepresent, and thus to
falsify to the viewers the consensus discoveries by the 9/11 truth movement that
the official claims concerning the events of 9/11 were bogus, thereby supporting
the official U.S. government’s fraudulent explanation and claims of the events
of that day.
Instead of carrying
out a balance assessment of the 9/11 truth movement, bringing in the many real
scientific and analytical discoveries made by its leading exponents, proving
beyond any shadow of doubt that the official government version of the events of
that day were fraudulent, the producers gave considerable unwarranted and
unjustified attention to the most outlandishly bogus explanations to justify
their underlying intent, in order to support their false and distorted
narrative.
All people with a
reasonable level of intelligence and a sense of truth and justice, who have done
a modicum of research into those events, come to the conclusion that the
official story is false in some measure. The points hereunder enumerated relate
to the sequential footage of said documentary.
The film started
reasonably well, narrated by Helen Boaden, covering a relatively broad area of
the atrocities of that day. However, she states with strong emphasis and
conviction: “There are more than fifty different conspiracy theories
about 9/11.” This statement was the first of many negatively-inclined inferences
to the 9/11 movement’s disagreement about the causes of the atrocities of that
day.
a. The easiest method of destroying the general consensus conclusions of a
cause is to emphasise some
of the wildest claims within its
ranks and to give sustenance to fabricated explanations or conclusions
that defy the laws of science and
physics.
i. This is precisely what the BBC has done in this regard.
1. The
classic tools of dark images, indicative of oppressive sinister intent, first
used by film makers in the
silent movie era of the 1920’s, were
employed by the producers of this documentary.
a. This is one of the techniques learnt by students of film making
today.
i. The objective in this regard was clear and obvious, using a
psychological technique for
audience manipulation, suggesting that certain chosen
entities are dubious or suspicious and not
to be taken seriously.
2. The producer
used the common time-wasting sequences, a ploy to use up valuable footage time,
of
asking Dylan Avery and Prof. Fetzer respectively, to ‘introduce’ the
audience into their homes where
the sequences were carried out without additional lighting, showing the
viewer into darkened areas.
This is a common psychological manipulative ploy!
a. The sequence introducing Dylan Avery of
Loose Change - dark images of what appeared to be a
dilapidated
country backwoods area, his prefab home followed by the dark interior as he
opens
the door to
the camera. All the occupants are in virtual silhouette form. His workroom is
dark,
dingy and
sombre-looking.
i. If the
documentary had been planned with integrity from the outset these sequences
would
have been shot without the valuable time-wasting views leading up to their home.
The
sequence of shots of Dylan’s co-workers would have been carried out with
harmonious
representation and respect that they deserved, and with the normal supplementary
lighting, thus
elevating the whole scenes.
3. The images of
Prof James Fetzer were created using a close-up focus technique, producing
occasional facially-distorted images.
a. The purpose here was clearly psychological.
The intent was to give the impression of ‘disturbance’
to the viewer. That is, ‘the person through the lens is disturbing,’
which translates to the viewer as a
‘disturbed person.’ This was an insulting and disrespectful
portrayal of Prof. Fetzer.
4. The names of the nineteen claimed hijackers were announced by the FBI
three days after the event.
a. A short time later it was found, (BBC
news covered this at the time), that several of them were still
alive, their identities having been stolen. A number of the
claimed hijackers were traced to the
Middle East, two of whom had never left their country.
i.
Several years later the FBI recanted on their original claims.
ii. Why did the producers leave out this information?
5. Introducing the events of 11th
September 2001 the narrator states: “…there happened to be a routine
defence exercise taking place at the U.S. Air Defence Command.”
a. The reality was something different. The exercise was huge and
unprecedented. The purpose of
which I shall not address here, as it does not fall within the content of
this complaint.
6. The narrator
introduced images from the hangar of archived remains, showing steel and other
artefacts
from the WTC. The images were dark and heavy. The camera focused on a
block of concrete. The
narrator said: “This is three floors of the World Trade Centre, compressed
and fused together, about
three feet thick.”
a. From the level of physics there are only two methods of fusion of
concrete available. The first is by
way of millions of pounds pressure per square inch (psi), over a
prolonged period of time. The
second is by way of high temperature combined with high pressure
with thousands of psi over
several hours. Both methods would fuse the constituents together.
b. The mere cold collapse of the same materials
would not produce such bonding in the short
timescale between the collapse and their find. The materials would
just fall apart.
i. Why did the producer not go further into this aspect?
7. Davin Coburn of
Popular Mechanics’ explanation of the collapse of the twin towers beggars’
belief!
His explanations have been proven numerous times by scientists within the
9/11 movement to be
unscientific and in violation of the laws of
physics in this regard.
a. Coburn purposefully failed to point out
that if the pancake scenario were feasible, the massive
central
core of steel beams and the strong resilient external steel cladding would have
remained in-
situ.
Common intelligence informs such!
b. At the beginning of the computer-generated
graphics of the pancake collapse, the central core was
shown
to remain. And there was no indication of the exterior cladding. Thus Coburn’s
claims are
fraudulent.
i.
The central core columns at the base of the towers were 36 inches wide by 16
inches deep by
4 inches thick. At
the 85th floor the columns had gradually reduced to 2 inches thick by
36
inches wide by 16
inches deep.
8. The computer animation of a Boeing 757 entering
the Pentagon, created by Prof. Chris Hoffmann of
Purdue University, Indiana is too simplistic for serious acceptance. A fourteen
year-old school student could do better.
a. The professor failed to take into account in his calculations the impact
that the claimed Boeing 757
would have received upon hitting the
specially reinforced exterior that the west wing underwent
prior to impact. His statement that the
plane was cut up as it entered the building, defies
intelligence, and defies the laws of
physics and logical thought. (The damage caused by the fuel is
an irrelevance in this regard.)
b. The question concerns the neat, near-perfect hole in the specially
reinforced external wall and
each of the succeeding inner walls to the
inner circle.
i. It would have been physically
impossible for any large aircraft to have impacted the Pentagon
without having left devastation in
its wake. There were no traces of the large fuselage, massive
wings, the huge tail-plane,
seats, luggage and passenger remains, let alone its two enormous
engines.
ii. The few tiny pieces of aircraft remains found at the scene did not
match the Boeing 757. A
photograph of U.S. Marines
carrying a tarpaulin-covered object, claiming that it was the
fuselage of the Boeing 757 was a fabrication. The
fuselage of any passenger aircraft would be
too large and too heavy for any group to carry.
iii. Video and photographic footage in
the minutes after the impact showed several large empty
cable rolls still standing a few
yards from the impact hole, intact and upright on their ends.
iv. Were a Boeing 757, or any other massive
passenger jetliner, to have flown at such a low
altitude to impact the Pentagon, the sound level of the jet engines would have
been so loud
that it would have been heard by hundreds of people nearby. (Loud noise travels
forward of
its movement.) Further, the wind turbulence at just 20 to 30 feet above ground
level would
have tossed vehicles off the road as it passed overhead.
v. Not shown on camera is the testimony
of Major General Albert Stubblebine, who was in
charge of imagery interpretation for scientific and technical intelligence
during the Cold War
era. Part of his function was to measure Soviet equipment from photographs. He
stated of the
Pentagon hole: “I look at the hole in the Pentagon, and I look at the size of an
airplane that
was supposed to have hit the Pentagon, and I said the plane does not fit that
hole. So what
did hit the Pentagon? Where is it? What’s going on?”
9. The C130
military plane flying over Washington at the time prior to the impact of the
object that hit the
Pentagon, claimed to have been flown by Col. Steve O’Brien, is not proof
that it was the plane flying
at that time. It should be born in mind that he is a military man, whose
paymaster is the Pentagon. He
therefore toes the line to protect his vested interests. Therefore,
the statement by Col. O’Brien cannot
be accepted as truthful.
10. United Airlines 93, Boeing 757 over Shanksville,
Pennsylvania was no less a fraud than each of the others. The coroner Mr Ually
Miller originally stated at the time of the crime that he withdrew himself from
the case because: “…there were no passenger bodies or body parts; no luggage and
no aircraft parts at the impact location in Indiana.” He later and on camera,
said that he was misquoted. Such denial and reversal of an original statement,
claiming to have been ‘misquoted,’ is standard practise after pressure, bribery
or blackmail has been applied. His later denial therefore cannot be accepted as
credible.
a. However, the United 93 incident is more contentious than the other three,
if for not other reason
that a highly emotive Hollywood film was made with that title. There were
very few eyewitnesses
who saw the plane near the scene of the claimed crash of UA 93, but
there are witnesses to a
small white, military-looking aircraft, which is naturally denied by the
authorities.
b. One matter that stands out above all others, and is similar to the
Pentagon incident, which is the lack of any substantial aircraft parts
and debris found at all aircraft crash sites. This is the one
definitive corroborative evidence of the crash.
i. The claimed witnesses Brenda Wasson and Barry Lichty who
claimed to have found pieces
of paper and cladding on the Indian Lake approximately a mile from
the impact crater,
produced a piece of paper and a small piece of black cloth from a
clear plastic envelope,
stating that they had flown on the wind. This is a highly
unlikely story and indicates falsity of
their whole story.
ii. If a piece of paper had flown a mile across country to Indian Lake
there would have been
dozens or hundreds of such pieces found between the impact site and
the piece found. The
locality would have been scattered with paper.
iii. For a piece of cloth cladding to have
‘floated on the wind’ to a mile’s distance is not
physically feasible unless with the aid of gale force winds. And as
with the paper,
there would have been many pieces found between the crash site and
Indian Lake.
iv. Her whole story therefore lacks credibility.
v. A photograph shown on the Internet,
taken (estimated about 300 to 400 yards distant) just
seconds
after the impact at the site shows a small mushroom-like cloud of medium grey
coloured smoke born upon a thin pillar of light coloured smoke, which was the
after effects of
some
form of military ordinance explosion at the scene. If strong winds were blowing
at the
time
the smoke would have scattered without uniformity.
vi. Photographs taken at around 100 yards
distant from another higher location of the claimed
impact site did not show an aircraft impact site. (These photos
are still available on the
Internet.) However, what can clearly be seen at the location is
a slight indentation in the
ground, believed to be an old filled in mine shaft, with a few
people inspecting the area.
There was no aircraft wreckage of any kind, and there was no
passenger luggage or seating
whatsoever.
vii. The claimed aircraft parts shown on camera of a flight
recorder, burnt hijacker’s passport
and a bandana in perfect condition and other debris cannot be
accepted as proof as
evidence. If the Boeing 757 had crashed at the location
the evidence would have been
monumental with debris everywhere.
viii. The impacted area would
have been strewn with wreckage far and wide. The fuselage,
massive wings, tail section, engines, seats, luggage, bodies and body parts
would have been
scattered all over the place.
ix. Flames would have engulfed the
wreckage for twenty minutes or more, and billowing black
smoke would have been seen over a mile distant.
x. The pitiful statement of Mr Lichty that: “…the aircraft and passengers are buried deep in the
ground…,” requires creative imagination to comprehend.
c.
Mary McFadden, who claimed to have been a passenger on Delta 89 from
Boston, which made an emergency landing at Cleveland, defies credibility. One
claimed passenger! How was she located? If her story was credible her name would
be on the passenger manifest, along with all other passengers of Delta 89. There
was no corroborative evidence.
11. The introduction of the story of the 4,000 Jews
who stayed away from work on 9/11, having been warned prior to the event, was a
completely new one to this writer, (who questioned the events on the day of the
atrocities and started investigations the following day.) This conspiracy
incident was clearly placed towards the end of the documentary as a trump card
to indicate the wild stories coming from some quarters of the 9/11
movement. However, certain people, mainly in executive positions, were advised
not to go into work at the twin towers or the Pentagon on that day. These
stories are factual and can be corroborated. Although the numbers warned would
be low.
a. Why did the producer not give this information?
12. The extensive use of Frank Spotnitz, the famous
writer and producer of the X-Files, to debunk all 9/11 conspiracy claims was a
little far fetched in an attempted cue de gras. He was used as the final
psychological trump card in an endeavour to discredit the entire 9/11 movement
in the eyes of the general public.
a. Frank Spotnitz spoke from a position of self-protection for his future
films. He therefore can only
be branded a blatant liar of the first order.
13. The claim that the CIA and FBI did not have
forewarning of the attacks is a further lie.
a. The secret services of many governments including Russia, Germany,
Italy, France, Egypt, India,
Israel and no doubt Britain, each were receiving ‘noise’ of the planning
and warned the U.S.
administration. This was later confirmed by the heads of state of some of
those countries.
b. Dale Watson, FBI’s head of Counter-Terrorism said that he knew:
“…there was another attack
planning, another attack coming. We had no ‘specific’ information.” His
statement was about 60
per cent true, in common with standard disinformation practise. The
approximate 40 per cent
falsity relates to their removal of all video tapes by force and threat
from all locations overlooking
the Pentagon within minutes of the incident; their fabricated information
of naming the claimed
hijackers; their fabricated video tape of the Osama bin Laded look-alike
claiming to have carried
out the attack. The list goes on.
14. The narrator
states: “The evidence points to a conspiracy after 9/11, not
before. The other 9/11
conspiracy theories are just that, theories. The evidence doesn’t support
them. Case closed!”
a. Ms Catz makes the final judgement to give the psychological
appearance of ‘authority’!
b. The narrator used the age-old psychology of closure by
addressing the families of those killed on
the day: “…however painful and
distressing that will be for the families of those who died that
day.”
15. The film ends
with funeral march-type music and the close-up of an aircraft taking off, with
an
underbelly shot of retracting landing gear. In
the background the sounds of the Flight Controller making
vain attempts to contact flight United 93, the sound trailing off into the
distance.
Note:
The BBC is on record of having received
prior warning of approximately 23 minutes or more, of the collapse of WTC 7,
before its eventual collapse at 5.20pm EST. This is confirmed by a copy of a
live BBC News transmission screened on September 11th 2001, where the
London presenter announces the collapse of the Salomon Brothers building (WTC 7)
at 5.07pm. He said: “… it is [WTC 7] only a few hundred yards away from where
the World Trade Centre towers were. It, [WTC 7] collapsed because the building
had been weakened...” He then introduces Jane Stanley, BBC correspondent in New
York, who comes on screen and refers, pointing to the smouldering wreckage, of
the aftermath of the twin towers’ collapse behind her. WTC 7 can clearly be seen
still standing. In the middle of her report her connection to London is then
cut.
a. Her connection was cut when someone at the BBC became aware that WTC
7 was still standing.
i. Thus the BBC received prior warning of WTC 7’s planned
collapse. This is further evidence
that the building did not collapse as a result of structural
failure.
Conclusion
Mr. Guy. Smith
claimed that he took nine months researching for the 9/11 documentary.
a. Mr. Smith failed to interview
the leading Scholar for 9/11 Truth, Prof David Ray Griffin, author
of the best
seller The New Pearl Harbour and other books on 9/11?
b. Mr. Smith failed to interview Prof. Steven
Jones, whose research and analysis discovery proved
that thermite and or
thermate were used to bring down the twin towers?
c. Mr. Smith failed to interview any of the more
than 200 senior military, intelligence service, law
enforcement,
government officials, professors, survivors and families of 9/11, (see Annex A),
each
of whom disputes
the official line of what happened on that day?
d. Mr.
Smith failed to interview the many eyewitnesses, (see Annex B
“World Trade Center Task
Force Interview Capt. Karin Deshore. November 2001” Refer to URL:
http://sfgate.com/gate/pictures/2005/09/10/ga_karen_deshore.pdf ),
– fire-fighters, police and
others who actually heard bombs exploding within buildings 1 and 2
before they were hit by the
aircraft? And more bombs going off on different levels after the two
buildings were hit?
e. If the twin towers collapsed in pancake form, as claimed in the
official U.S. government report,
then the resulting collapse would have caused 110 floors of each of
the twin towers to fall on top
of each other. The consequence of such collapse would have resulted in large floor areas
remaining intact, as well as hundreds of tons of broken concrete of
varying large sizes.
i. But the physics of the aftermath proved that something else
occurred. Instead of the floors
falling one upon the other, the concrete and contents of the
buildings were pulverised into tens
of thousands of tons of fine powder.
ii. Mr.
Smith failed to focus upon this aspect of the
towers’ destruction? But instead, he
took the juvenile theory of a pancake collapse, using it as a
central theme, a conspiracy theory
that contradicts the laws of physical science, when viewing
photos of ground zero after the
collapse.
f. If the producers were so interested to ascertain the truth of that
day through researching the 9/11
truth movement,
why did they not use their collective intelligence
by following the logical route
of physical evidence, (photographs, video footage, etc), rather
than spending so much time
consorting with pro-government theorists who put forth explanations that contradicted the physical
evidence and the laws of science, but supported the
official U.S. government’s conspiracy of mass
murder of its own people?
The answer to those
questions and many more is patently clear. The producers had no intention of
supporting a version of events of that day that conflicted with the U.S. 9/11 official report, and that which Prime Minister Blair supports, because it would
conflict with Blair’s co-invasion of two sovereign nations, based upon fabricated
information and lies, resulting in the criminal slaughter of more than 650,000
Iraqis, thousands of American and allied soldiers and the murder of 93
journalists by U.S. and other forces
http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/Iraq/Iraq_danger.html .
Thus the BBC’s
future is secured with the assistance of BBC personnel who prostitute
themselves, their craft and their profession for the protection of their own
personal futures. Their personal integrities become fluid in accordance with
their financial security.
The first and
foremost duty of all reporters is to investigate a story to ascertain its basis
of truth or otherwise, and thereupon to truthfully write their conclusions and
to transmit this truth to the general public.
In an ethical world
any reporter falsifying the facts of a story is in dereliction of their duty to
the general public and to themselves as human beings. It is therefore tantamount to fraud. Therefore those
involved in screening this documentary would be prosecuted for misrepresentation
and deliberate fraudulent distortion of the facts.
Yours sincerely,
Signed: Philip Dawes
Attached: Annexes A
and B
Note:
It is not uncommon for the U.S.
government, or the British government for that matter, or their agencies to
distort facts and fabricate information, thus lying to the general public in
support of their hidden agendas. The following article of 22nd
February 2007 is but one illustration of this:
“PRODUCT PLUNDER OF THE WEEK:
CHILDREN’S PLASTIC LUNCH BOXES
Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act were released that show
the U.S. government’s Consumer Protection Safety Commission (CPSC) concealed
evidence indicating dangerously high levels of lead in children’s plastic
lunchboxes. Back in 2005, the non-profit Center for Environmental Health made
national news when their investigations found high levels of lead in children’s
vinyl lunchboxes. The CPSC immediately countered that report by saying its own
studies revealed no problems. On the contrary, documents released last week show
the agency’s own tests actually found lead contamination up to 16 times higher
than what is allowed in lead paint. The government’s motivation for a cover-up
that threatens the health of the nation’s children is unclear, but an allied
group of state Attorney Generals is being organized to ultimately remove these
lunchboxes from the marketplace.
http://www.organicconsumers.org/afc.cfm
Order a lead lunchbox testing kit
from the Center for Environmental Health:
http://www.testyourlunchbox.com
=======================================
Annex A
A small selection
of the distinguished leaders and experts, with short quotes about their
misgivings with the 9/11 Commission and the questions that are still
smouldering.
[The final conclusion is noteworthy.]
Summarized from
www.patriotsquestion911.com
Senator Max Cleland - Former member of the 9/11 Commission,
resigned in December 2003:
"I, as a member of the [9/11] Commission, cannot look any American in the
eye... It is a national scandal... this White House wants to cover [9/11] up."
Senator Mark Dayton - Member, Senate Committee on Armed Services and
Homeland Security: "[NORAD] lied to the American people, they lied to
Congress and they lied to your 9/11 Commission...the most gross incompetence and
dereliction of responsibility and negligence"
Congressman Ron Paul - Vice Chairman of the Oversight and Investigations
subcommittee:
“The [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less
cover-up and no real explanation"
Congressman Curt Weldon: "[9/11 Commission] there's something very
sinister going on here... something desperately wrong... This involved what is
right now the covering up of information that led to the deaths of 3,000 people"
Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney - Member of the House Armed Services
Committee:
“The [9/11] Commission ran up against obstruction by the administration and
non-cooperation from government agencies... the errors and omissions immediately
jumped out at us"
Director of the FBI, Louis Freeh: "[9/11 Commission findings]
raise serious challenges to the commission's credibility and, if the facts prove
out, might just render the commission historically insignificant itself"
Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury, Paul Craig Roberts, PhD:
"Distinguished national and international scientists and scholars present
massive evidence that the 9/11 Commission Report is a hoax and that the 9/11
"terrorist attack" has been manipulated to serve a hegemonic agenda in the
Middle East... We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much
less steel columned buildings, to "pancake" at free fall speed. Therefore, it is
a non-controversial fact that the official explanation of the collapse of the
WTC buildings is false"
Assistant Secretary of Housing, Catherine Austin Fitts: "The
official story could not possibly have happened... It’s not possible. It’s not
operationally feasible... The Commission was a whitewash. "
U.S. Army Intelligence officer, Federal Prosecutor, Office of Special
Investigations, U.S. Department of Justice, John Loftus: "The information
provided by European intelligence services prior to 9/11 was so extensive that
it is no longer possible for either the CIA or FBI to assert a defence of
incompetence"
Foreign Service Officer, George Kenney: "I cannot believe, much
as I might like to, the standard account of 9/11"
Foreign Service Officer, J. Michael Springman: "Fifteen of the
nineteen people who allegedly flew airplanes into buildings in the United States
got their visas from the same CIA Consulate at Jeddah"
Deputy Attorney General, State of Pennsylvania, Philip J. Berg,
Esquire: "The official story of what actually took place on 9/11 is a
lie. "
Major General U.S. Army, Commanding General of U.S. Army Intelligence and
Security Command, Albert Stubblebine [his specialty – analyzing satellite
photos]: "I look at the hole in the Pentagon and I look at the size of
an airplane that was supposed to have hit the Pentagon. And I said, ‘The plane
does not fit in that hole. So what did hit the Pentagon?’”
Col. Robert Bowman, U.S. Air Force,
Director of Advanced Space Programs, PhD Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering:
"The official 9/11 story is impossible .. There is a cover up... high levels
of our government don't want us to know what happened... highly placed
individuals in the administration...Dick Cheney...the very kindest thing we can
say about George W Bush...is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder."
Col. George Nelson, U.S. Air Force, aircraft accident investigator:
"I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was
accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to
positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the
aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident... The
government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of
September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths
of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has
been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On
the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept
hidden from view .. with all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon
crash site, any unbiased rational
investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon
as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the
Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a
passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the
Boeing 757 as alleged .. the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history."
Major Douglas Rokke, PhD, U.S. Army:
[Regarding the impact at the Pentagon on
9/11/2001] "When you look at the damage, it was obviously a missile."
Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force, fighter pilot, commercial pilot
flying 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777s. Had previously flown
Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to
hit the WTC: "The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total
B.S. plain and simple...[Regarding Flight 77]"The airplane could not have flown
at those speeds which they said it did without going into what they call a high
speed stall. The airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G
maneuvers at those bank angles... The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not
Flight 77"
Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force, Office of the Secretary
of Defense, staff of the Director of the National Security Agency: "It is
as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government
conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability
or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws
of probability and physics...There was a
dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked Pentagon, where I stood only
minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there
was no sign of the kind of damage one would expect from the impact of a large
airliner... this visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to
the Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue
referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a ' missile ' ... I
saw nothing of significance at the point of contact ~ no airplane metal or cargo
debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke
billowed from within the Pentagon .. all of us staring at the Pentagon that
morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected was not
evident .. the same is true with regard to the damage we expected .. but I did
not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no
larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it
remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof remaining relatively
straight .. The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a
strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would have
expected if a missile had struck the Pentagon "
Senior Military Affairs Journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School,
Barbara Honegger, MS: "The US military, not al Qaeda, had the sustained
access weeks before 9/11 to also plant controlled demolition charges throughout
the superstructures of WTC 1 and WTC 2, and in WTC 7, which brought down all
three buildings on 9/11...A US military plane, not one piloted by al Qaeda,
performed the highly skilled, high-speed 270 degree dive towards the Pentagon
that Air Traffic Controllers on 9/11 were sure was a military plane as they
watched it on their screens. Only a military aircraft, not a civilian plane
flown by al Qaeda, would have given off the "Friendly" signal needed to disable
the Pentagon’s anti-aircraft missile batteries as it approached the
building...Only the US military, not al Qaeda, had the ability to break all of
its Standard Operating Procedures to paralyze its own emergency response system"
Capt. Gregory M. Zeigler, PhD, U.S. Army, U.S. Army Intelligence
Officer: "I knew from September 18, 2001, that the official story about
9/11 was false. ... [A]nomalies poured in rapidly: the hijackers' names
appearing in none of the published flight passenger lists, BBC reports of stolen
identities of the alleged hijackers or the alleged hijackers being found alive,
the obvious demolitions of WTC 1 and 2...and WTC7...not hit by an airplane...the
lack of identifiable Boeing 757 wreckage at the Pentagon"
Capt. Eric H. May, U.S. Army, Intelligence officer: "I view the
911 event ...as a matter that implies either...A) passive participation by the
Bush White House through a deliberate stand-down or B) active execution of a
plot by rogue elements of government, starting with the White House itself, in
creating a spectacle of destruction that would lead the United States into an
invasion of the Middle East"
Former Chairman, National Intelligence Estimates, CIA, responsible for
preparing the President’s Daily Brief, U.S. Army Intelligence Officer,
Raymond L. McGovern:
"I think at simplest terms, there’s a cover-up. The 9/11 report is a
joke...just as Hitler in 1933 cynically exploited the burning of the parliament
building, the Reichstag, this is exactly what our President did in exploiting
9/11...making a war of aggression on a country that he knew had nothing to do
with 9/11...that’s certainly an impeachable offense...But compelling evidence
for an even more disturbing conclusion: that the 9/11 attacks were themselves
orchestrated by this administration precisely so they could be thus exploited."
National Intelligence Officer and Director of the CIA's Office of Regional
and Political Analysis, William Christison: "there is persuasive evidence
that the events of September did not unfold as the Bush administration and the
9/11 Commission would have us believe. An airliner almost certainly did not hit
The Pentagon. The North and South Towers of the World Trade Center almost certainly did not collapse
and fall to earth because hijacked aircraft hit them...this all was totally an
inside job. I have since decided that... at least some elements in this US
government had contributed in some way or other to causing 9/11 to happen or at
least allowing it to happen... The reason that the two towers in New York
actually collapsed and fell all the way to the ground was controlled explosions
rather than just being hit by two airplanes. All of the characteristics of these
demolitions show that they almost had to have been controlled explosions... I
think you almost have to look at the 9/11 Commission Report as a joke and not a
serious piece of analysis at all... It's a monstrous crime."
U.S. Marine Corps intelligence officer, case officer CIA. Robert David
Steele: "I am forced to conclude that there is sufficient evidence to
indict (not necessarily convict) Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and others...This is,
without question, the most important modern reference on state-sponsored
terrorism, and also the reference that most pointedly suggests that select rogue
elements within the US Government, most likely led by Dick Cheney with the
assistance of George Tenet, Buzzy Kronguard, and others close to the Wall Street
gangs, are the most guilty of state-sponsored terrorism...I'm absolutely certain
that WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition and that as far as I'm
concerned means that this case has not been properly investigated. There's no
way that building could have come down without controlled demolition."
CIA Case Officer, Specialist in the
Middle East, Directorate of Operations, Awarded Career Intelligence Medal,
Robert Baer: [Regarding the opinion
there was an aspect of 'inside job' to 9/11 within the
U.S. Government], "There is that possibility, the
evidence points at it."
Counter-terrorism expert in the Security Division of the federal Aviation
Administration. Team leader of the FAA's Red (Terrorism) Team in the Federal Air
Marshall program, Coast Guard officer, Bogdan Dzakovic: "At worst, I
think the 9/11 Commission Report is treasonous."
Minister of Justice, West Germany, Horst
Ehmke, PhD:
"Terrorists could not have
carried out such an operation with four hijacked planes without the support of a
secret service."
State Secretary, Federal Ministry of
Defense, West Germany, Andreas von Buelow, PhD:
"The official story is so inadequate and
far-fetched that there must be another one...This is unthinkable, without
years-long support from secret apparatuses of the state and industry."
President of Italy, Francesco Cossiga:
"[9/11] could not be accomplished without infiltrations in the radar and
flight security personnel."
General Leonid Ivashov, Chief of Staff, Russian armed forces, Ministry of
Defense:
"Only secret services and their current chiefs “or those retired but
still having influence inside the state organizations“ have the ability to plan,
organize and conduct an operation [9/11] of such magnitude...Osama bin Laden and
"Al Qaeda" cannot be the organizers nor the performers of the September 11
attacks. They do not have the necessary organization, resources or leaders."
Foreign Minister of Egypt, Mohamed
Hassanein Heikal: "Bin Laden does not
have the capabilities for an operation [9/11] of this magnitude. When I hear
Bush talking about al-Qaida as if it was Nazi
Germany or the communist party of the Soviet Union, I
laugh because I know what is there. Bin Laden has been under surveillance for
years: every telephone call was monitored and al-Qaeda has been penetrated by
American intelligence, Pakistani intelligence, Saudi intelligence, Egyptian
intelligence. They could not have kept secret an operation that required such a
degree of organisation and sophistication."
Chief of Staff, Pakistani Army, General Mirza Aslam Beg: "The
information which is now coming up, goes to prove that involvement by the ‘rogue
elements’ of the U.S. military and intelligence organization is getting more
obvious. Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda definitely do not have the know-how and
the capability to launch such operations involving such high precision
coordination, based on information and expertise."
European Parliament, Committee on Security and Defense, Giulietto
Chiesa: "Billions of people were given only one explanation....which is
entirely false....everyone who dares to question it is treated as if he was a
fool."
French Army Intelligence and artillery officer, Col. Pierre-Henri Bunel, Expert
in the effects of artillery weapons and explosives: "Image of the impact
on the Pentagon is very instructive as to the nature of the explosion. ... It
corresponds to a detonation of an explosive with high energetic power. The
explosion does not correspond to a deflagration of kerosene...suggests a single
engine flying vehicle much smaller in size than an airliner...resembles the
effects of anti-concrete hollow charges that I have been able to observe on a
number of battlefields...lead me therefore to think that the detonation that
struck the building was that of a high-powered hollow charge used to destroy
hardened buildings and carried by an aerial vehicle, a missile."
Safety Engineer and accident Analyst, National Safety Technology
Authority, Finland, Heikki Kurttila, PhD:
"Conclusion: The observed
collapse time of WTC 7 was 6.5 seconds. That is only half a second longer than
it would have taken for the top of the building to fall to the ground in a
vacuum, and half a second shorter than the falling time of an apple when air
resistance is taken into account. ... The great speed of the collapse and the
low value of the resistance factor strongly suggest controlled demolition."
Chairman, 9/11 Commission, Thomas H. Kean, Former Governor of New Jersey:
"FAA and NORAD officials advanced an account of 9/11 that was untrue...We, to
this day, don't know why NORAD told us what they told us...It was just so far
from the truth."
Vice Chairman, 9/11 Commission, Lee Hamilton, Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence, Homeland Security Advisory Council: "we got started late;
we had a very short time frame...we did not have enough money...We had a lot of
people strongly opposed to what we did. We had a lot of trouble getting access
to documents and to people. ... So there were all kinds of reasons we thought we
were set up to fail."
9/11 Commissioner, Timothy J. Roemer, PhD, Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence:
"That panel members so distrusted testimony from Pentagon officials that they
referred their concerns to the Pentagon's inspector general...We were extremely
frustrated with the false statements we were getting."
Senior Counsel, 9/11 Commission, John J. Farmer, Jr., Former Attorney
General, NJ, Former Commissioner of the State Commission of Investigations:
[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]
- "I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described...
The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the
public for two years."
IN CONCLUSION...
An excerpt from an authentic interview of our supposed enemy,
criminal mastermind and arch-villain Osama bin Laden himself (as opposed to the
fake tapes released by the CIA)...
Source: Ummat, Urdu-language daily newspaper based in Karachi, Pakistan
- Friday, 28 September 2001 - pages 1, 7. Source: BBC Monitoring Service. -
Source:
http://www.khilafah.com/1421/category.php?DocumentID=2392&TagID=2
[Note: The above
link no longer exists. P.D.]
“I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the
United States... I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the
killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act.
“Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other
people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. It is the
United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and
common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam...
“America does not want to see anyone equal to it. It expects slavery from
others. Therefore, other countries are either its slaves or subordinates.
Whoever committed the act of 11 September are not the friends of the American
people. I have already said that we are against the American system, not against
its people, whereas in these attacks, the common American people have been
killed…
“The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within
itself; the people who are a part of the U.S. system…those who are working for
some other system; persons who want to make the present century as a century of
conflict between Islam and Christianity…They can be anyone, from Russia to
Israel and from India to Serbia…
“Then there are intelligence agencies in the U.S., which require billions of
dollars worth of funds from the Congress and the government every year. This
[funding issue] was not a big problem till the existence of the former Soviet
Union but after that the budget of these agencies has been in danger. They
needed an enemy…
“You see, the Bush Administration approved a budget of 40 billion dollars. Where
will this huge amount go? It will be provided to the same agencies, which need
huge funds and want to exert their importance. Now they will spend the money for
their expansion and for increasing their importance. I will give you an example.
Drug smugglers from all over the world are in contact with the U.S. secret
agencies. These agencies do not want to eradicate narcotics cultivation and
trafficking because their importance will be diminished. The people in the U.S.
Drug Enforcement Department are encouraging drug trade so that they could show
performance and get millions of dollars worth of budget. General Noriega was
made a drug baron by the CIA and, in need, he was made a scapegoat...
“In the same way, whether it is President Bush or any other U.S. President, they
cannot bring Israel to justice for its human rights abuses or to hold it
accountable for such crimes. What is this? Is it not that there exists a
government within the government in the United States? That secret government
must be asked as to who carried out the attacks…
“I have already said that we are not hostile to the United States. We are
against the [U.S. Government] system, which makes other nations slaves of the
United States, or forces them to mortgage their political and economic freedom.
This system is totally in control of the American-Jews, whose first priority is
Israel, not the United States. It is clear that the American people are
themselves the slaves of the Jews and are forced to live according to the
principles and laws laid by them. So, the punishment should reach Israel. In
fact, it is Israel, which is giving a blood bath to innocent Muslims and the
U.S. is not uttering a single word…
“The Western media is unleashing such a baseless propaganda, which makes us
surprise but it reflects on what is in their hearts and gradually they
themselves become captive of this propaganda. They become afraid of it and begin
to cause harm to themselves. Terror is the most dreaded weapon in modern age and
the Western media is mercilessly using it against its own people. It can add
fear and helplessness in the psyche of the people of Europe and the United
States. It means that what the enemies of the United States cannot do, its media
is doing that. You can understand as to what will be the performance of the
nation in a war, which suffers from fear and helplessness...”
==========================================
Annex B
The first pdf
document is 25 pages long and is evidence of bomb explosions within the twin
towers prior to their collapse.
WTC Task Force Interview with Capt. Karin Deshore –
November 2001
http://a1022.g.akamai.net/f/1022/8160/1d/www.newsday.com/includes/fdny-9-11/pdf/9110192.pdf
===============================================
Return to lead page
|
|