TINFOILHAT: Carry out such a complicated task

Thursday, August 14, 2014

http://dollarvigilante.com/blog/2014/8/5/the-walls-are-crumbling-down-around-911-why.html#6470

THE WALLS ARE CRUMBLING DOWN AROUND 9/11 – WHY?
[Editor's Note: The following post is by TDV Editor-in-Chief, Jeff Berwick] 

*** begin quote ***

Former Senator Bob Graham (D-Fla.), who co-chaired a congressional inquiry into 9/11 — separate from the 9/11 Commission — stated, as though now it was obvious, “None of the people leading this investigation think it is credible that 19 people — most who could not speak English and did not have previous experience in the United States — could carry out such a complicated task without external assistance.”

*** end quote ***

Can say what you want BUT, (and there is always a BIG butt), I don’t believe the “official story” on anything ever.

# – # – # – # – #   


TINFOILHAT: Deafness Before the Storm? Or more power!

Saturday, October 5, 2013

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html?_r=1&

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
The Deafness Before the Storm
By KURT EICHENWALD
Published: September 10, 2012 913 Comments

*** begin quote ***

IT was perhaps the most famous presidential briefing in history.

On Aug. 6, 2001, President George W. Bush received a classified review of the threats posed by Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, Al Qaeda. That morning’s “presidential daily brief” — the top-secret document prepared by America’s intelligence agencies — featured the now-infamous heading: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” A few weeks later, on 9/11, Al Qaeda accomplished that goal.

On April 10, 2004, the Bush White House declassified that daily brief — and only that daily brief — in response to pressure from the 9/11 Commission, which was investigating the events leading to the attack. Administration officials dismissed the document’s significance, saying that, despite the jaw-dropping headline, it was only an assessment of Al Qaeda’s history, not a warning of the impending attack. While some critics considered that claim absurd, a close reading of the brief showed that the argument had some validity.

That is, unless it was read in conjunction with the daily briefs preceding Aug. 6, the ones the Bush administration would not release. While those documents are still not public, I have read excerpts from many of them, along with other recently declassified records, and come to an inescapable conclusion: the administration’s reaction to what Mr. Bush was told in the weeks before that infamous briefing reflected significantly more negligence than has been disclosed. In other words, the Aug. 6 document, for all of the controversy it provoked, is not nearly as shocking as the briefs that came before it.

*** and ***

Could the 9/11 attack have been stopped, had the Bush team reacted with urgency to the warnings contained in all of those daily briefs? We can’t ever know. And that may be the most agonizing reality of all.

*** end quote ***

As usual, “we, the sheeple” never get the full story.

Not that the NYT is source of truth.

Or does one assume, for lack of any other motive, that this moves us further from “liberty” to “tyranny”.

I don’t know what perverse calculus moves politicians, but I do know nothing is impossible!

I hope there is a special place in, a special circle of, Hell for all these.

# – # – # – # – #   


TINFOILHAT: 911 Truthers

Wednesday, September 14, 2011

http://lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts324.html

The Critics of 9/11 Truth: Do They Have A Case?
by Paul Craig Roberts

*** begin quote ***

Both sides of the issue have conspiracy theories. 9/11 was a conspiracy whether a person believes that it was an inside job or that a handful of Arabs outwitted the entire intelligence apparatus of the Western world and the operational response of NORAD and the US Air Force.

*** and ***

It is not a conspiracy theory to examine the evidence and to state that the evidence does not support the explanation that has been given.

*** end quote ***

“If it doesn’t fit, you must acquit.” —Johnny Cochran

A true tin foil hat doesn’t need to prove conspiracy. All one really needs to do is to present evidence. Facts are hard things to argue with. Opinions are like <synonym for donkey> holes, everyone has one.

No, the evidence just is what it is.

Speculation, SWAGs, and theories are all unnecessary and irrelevant to the discussion.

So, I’ll only ask one question so as not to confuse anyone.

*** begin quote ***

If there were pictures or videos of an airliner hitting the Pentagon, they would have been released years ago. They would have been supplied to the 9/11 Commission. Why would the government refuse for 10 years to release pictures that prove its case? The FBI confiscated all film from all surveillance cameras. No one has seen them, much less a Pentagon critic such as Spinney.

*** end quote ***

Where are the videos from the airplane into the Pentagon?

Simple question. Deserves a simple answer.

# # # # #


TINFOILHAT: Eleven 9/11 Questions

Tuesday, July 19, 2011

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/07/11/eleven-911-questions-which-still-demand-answers

Eleven 9/11 Questions Which Still Demand Answers
by Allen L Roland

*** begin quote ***

Warburton than makes his point ~ Crystallizing this down to a few basic principles of criminal and investigative journalism you at the BBC have failed as a fact to ask these basic questions about 9/11;

  1. Where is the film footage of the Boeing striking the Pentagon?
  2. Why haven’t your journalists asked the US authorities to see it? Why is it secret?
  3. Why haven’t you interviewed people like April Gallop who stepped through that Pentagon hole after the attack and said there was no plane there?
  4. Why haven’t you interviewed firefighters who heard explosions in the Twin Towers?
  5. Why haven’t you been able to show substantial wreckage (or photos of) from the Shanksville site?
  6. Why do you only interview explosives experts that back the official version ?
  7. Why don’t you speak to any pilots from pilots for 9/11truth ?
  8. Why don’t you speak to victim’s family members who still demand an independent investigation?
  9. Why are 5 of the alleged hijackers alive and well according to your own news reporting ? Who then did hijack the planes?
  10. Why aren’t you seeking written scientific evidence to rebut the compelling Thermite explosion claims of the teams of Richard Gage and Niels Harrit?
  11. Why are your programs “conspiracy files” on 9/11 so overtly biased as to not withstand scrutiny as fair and objective ~ and why don’t they address any of the above issues ?

*** and ***

“There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a “missile” … Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former Political-Military Affairs Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Also served on the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency.

*** end quote ***

I have no answer for the unthinkable.

Anyone remember Operation Northwoods?

# # # # #


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,050 other followers

%d bloggers like this: