Sunday, March 25, 2012

Fatal Holes Destroy Bush's Lies about 911

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Conan Doyle, the creator of Sherlock Holmes, put into his character's mouth the following:
When you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains however implausible must be the truth!
--'Sherlock Holmes' (created by A. Conan Doyle)
We can eliminate the Bush administration's "official conspiracy theory" of 911! There is no evidence of any kind --admissible or no --that will confirm any part of it. It can be shown to be utterly impossible! Ergo: it did not happen!

History is often re-written after-the fact! A 'cover-story', however, is a pre-emptive strike. The 'first' story to be rolled out is often entrenched by the time fatal flaws are discovered. This is the case with 911! 911 was never properly investigated. Bush and major players in his administration as well as various elements of the Military-Industrial Complex found common ground: all were and remain heavily invested in Bush's 'official' conspiracy theory of 911!

In at least one case, a single fatal hole demolishes the entire stack of cards! Alas --there are numerous fatal holes, anyone one of which collapse the entire 'rotten edifice'! For example, American Airlines itself was/is the source for my blog article of about 2 years ago in which it was revealed that Flight 11 did not fly nor had been scheduled to fly on 911. Flight 11 is crucial to Bush's conspiracy theory!

The TIP off was a Wikipedia article which had been revised to reflect a truth about Flight 11, that it had not been scheduled to fly on 911. If, indeed, 11 did not fly, the Bush conspiracy theory of some 19 Arab hijackers is dead in the water. 

I wanted confirmation that it was --indeed --American Airlines that had made the change.I confirmed this with a WHOIS look-up of the IP address making the change. It was --indeed --American Airlines! AA itself had been the source of the Wiki change that now said that Flight 11 had not been scheduled to fly on 911. In fact, the flight had been mothballed for some 6 months as I recall. There is no information that it had ever been pressed into service at any time and most certainly not at the 11th hour. There is simply no evidence that supports the Bush theory with respect to any of the alleged flights whatsoever.

There are other holes in the Bush conspiracy theory. Any ONE of them destroys the whole rotten edifice as Bush's theory relies on all of them being true. All are essential if Bush is to be believed:
  1. No airliner wreckage or parts traceable to any airliner were ever recovered at the Pentagon.
  2. NO Arabs were on the official autopsy report nor is there any confirmation that any arabs were ever buried at any place and any time. 
  3. Only Pentagon employees were buried at Arlington National cemetery; there is NO record that any passengers were buried.
  4. BBC reported that Hani Hanjour could not have gotten on board because he did not have a ticket! Are we to believe a 90 pound weakling crashed the gate?
  5. Official BTS records indicate that the cockpit door was never opened during the flight! Assuming Hani got on board (see above) how did he manage to walk through a closed door?
As Orwell taught us --history is re-written daily these days. The best that we can do is point out the utter impossibility of the Bush 'official conspiracy theory of 911'. Bush lied! It has been my experience covering high profile murder trials, big city crime and politics that only the guilty and/or complicit are sufficiently motivated to actually lie about a crime. Bush, most of his administration in fact, lied!

Our only consolation is that the
fatal holes in the theory are so large that not even BIG BRO can plug them up. The people themselves could help the cause of truth by honing some elementary skills to include the refusal to swallow utter junk that violates basic principles of physics, junk that ...
  • is internally inconsistent
  • is blatantly inconsistent with its own timelines
  • is blatantly inconsistent from one version to the next.
The best example of the last entry is Don Rumseld who referred to (his words) "....the MISSILE that struck this (Pentagon) building." That's called a Freudian slip. Rumsfeld knew that no airliner had struck the Pentagon. He slipped up and told the truth. I believe that the offending missile was the U.S. Global Hawk --but the precise type of missile does not matter at this point! We may never know because Bush ordered the complete and utter destruction of all material evidence relating to the crimes of 911! What matters now is that the Bush theory can be utterly debunked.

The weakest link is Hani Hanjour! The Washington Post said that Hanjour could not have gotten on board! He did not have a ticket! Moreover, the National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB| released flight data which indicated that the cabin door (Flt 77) was NEVER opened during flight!! So --HOW could Hani Hanjour have gained entrance to the cockpit? Are we to believe Hani Hanjour walked through closed cabin door?
  • The ONLY OFFICIAL SCRAP of evidence to have survived the Bush cover up is the AUTOPSY REPORT released to Dr. Olmstead via an FOIA request. There are NO ARABS on the list. Ergo: there is no reason to believe that there were any Arabs on board! 
  • there is no record of any passenger being autopsied and, in the process, identified;
  • while Pentagon employees were buried at Arlington Cemetery, there is NO record of a single burial for any passenger. Where were/are their remains?
Almost forgotten these days, is the BBC story that early on inspired my suspicions. The BBC interviewed several hijackers after Bush had said that they perished in the 911 attacks. If hijackers --specifically those said to have piloted or were on board the flights at issue --were interviewed alive after 911, then Bush lied! If Bush lied, the official theory cannot be believed nor supported in any way whatsoever.

As Arthur Conan Doyle wrote: "When you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains however improbable must be the truth!" What remains are two facts: 1) Bush lied to hide the truth; 2) 911 was a govt/Bush admin inside job!

12 comments:

Noor al Haqiqa said...

http://snippits-and-slappits.blogspot.ca/2012/03/fatal-holes-destroy-bushs-lies-about.html

More excellent work about something that has become more and more like the Holocaust every day.

Don't question, no proof, accept what you are told despite all the incongruities and evidence to the contrary of your politically correct and staged explanations.

Len Hart said...

Thanks for commenting, Noor. Your comments are always welcome. I agree completely with your 'Holocaust' analogy.

mijj said...

the fact of cover up, distortion, lies, etc is more important than any theories of what actually took place.

Whatever the theories of what actually took place - it is 100% fact that elements of government *did* conspire to create a mythology and manage evidence to ensure it'd be unlikely their mythology wouldn't be undermined. That is fact. It is not theory.

Unfortunately for them, they were too focussed on ensuring there was no evidence about what *did* happen. They didn't worry about the abundant evidence of their conspiracy to create a mythology.

And that this mythology creation and evidence scrambling *certainly* took place is proof that the government is prepared to use this method when it sees fit. This isn't a theory. It is fact.

Unless information can be cross-checked against info from an independent non-western government managed, non-corporate managed source then we should assume managed mythology.


so .. the popular view of the background for these situations can be assumed to be government/corporate generated mythology: Libya, Syria, Iran, aircraft bombing over Lockerbie, Oklahoma bombing.

The question i ask myself whenever i see a scenario evolving via excited reportage is "am i seeing the birth of another managed mythology?"

Len Hart said...

miji wrote:

Whatever the theories of what actually took place - it is 100% fact that elements of government *did* conspire to create a mythology and manage evidence to ensure it'd be unlikely their mythology wouldn't be undermined.

You're right! As one of the characters portrayed by Jack Nicholson once said on the silver screen: "When you're right, you're right ...and you're right!"

Indeed! It's almost tautological to say that only the guilty have motive to lie about a crime. Bushco had motive to lie about the crime of 911!

...they were too focussed on ensuring there was no evidence about what *did* happen.

Exactly and that's what all 'guilty' folk do! They focus on 1) destroying evidence that might implicate them 2) puking up a cover story! In this case, Bush ordered the destruction of evidence and , rather than investigating, he puked up a story that is not only without any evidence whatsoever, it is utterly impossible. It did not happen because it could not have happened.

The give-away in EVERY such case are the FATAL HOLES in every cover story. As a long time reporter at every level including national, I have NEVER encountered a innocent person who had MOTIVE to lie about the crime of which he/she had been accused of. Rather --the INNOCENT have a 'stake' in ensuring that the truth is known. An INNOCENT person would NEVER have reviled, demonized or have WARNED --ominously --those brave few who dared to call Bush the liar that he was and remains! The guilty, by contrast, have a vested interest in promoting a cover story, a lie, a distraction!

At last --it is a matter of the BURDEN OF PROOF. It is the standard in law. If the prosecution should bring a case, he/she is expected to PROVE IT IN COURT where the rules of evidence apply, where an independent jury may rule upon BONA FIDE evidence --not ominous, threatening warnings from someone who has a vested interest in suppressing the truth! Any lawyer threatening a jury --as Bush and comany threatened the American people --would be disbarred and if not disbarred laughed out of court.

The glaring holes 'listed' in this short article are but a few of perhaps thousands of MIRACLES that one must believe in order to believe the word of a proven liar: BUSH!

In law, the 'burden of proof' rests upon the prosecution; likewise, in formal debate, the 'burden of proof' rests with the 'affirmative' to either PROVE or substantially support his/her case! Bush did NOT support his case! Rather --HE THREATENED anyone who dared question his bald-faced lies!

The burden of proof is easily summed up: THOSE WHO ASSERT MUST PROVE! Bush asserted a theory which 1) he did NOT prove nor support in any way whatsoever 2) he LIED and those lies are demonstrable and would have been demonstrable in court 3) only those who are GUILYT are thus motived to LIE and cover up a crime!

Len Hart said...

A moron calling himself RG posted the following abusive/bullshit comment:

"19 men in the name of Islamic jihad killed thousands of people.
That is murder. You need to get your head out of your ass. To Islamists like Noor and Mijj, you are a usefull idiot. When they are done with you, they will render you your "just reward", infidel."


Show me the names of those hijackers on ANY Flight manifest --or STFU!

Show me AA records that prove said flight flew!

Show me the OFFICIAL AUTOPSY REPORT that lists both passengers and hijackers and tell me what was done with the bodies of those who were said to have died in a flight that for which there is --in fact --NO EVIDENCE of any sort that it ever fucking existed!

I only posted this garbage to illustrate WHY I moderate comments.

Having done this for years, I have seen it all. Comments (like the one above) are:

1) reason to MOURN the utter failure of the U.S. to educate its children;

2) tragically typical of UTTERLY FAILED educational systems like those in Bush/Perry Texas, a state which obviously deliberately sabotaged public education in order to FILL UP THE CORPORATE OWNED prisons;

3) have only gotten more insane, stupid and belligerent in the last ten years ---EIGHT of which were years BUSH succeeded in FUCKING UP!

Now --there are words for people who believe shit for which there is NO evidence whatseover. Those words are:

1) DELUSIONAL!

3) INSANE

3) PSYCHOTIC

4) NUTS!

6) CROOKED!

Anonymous said...

The silence on 911 is deafening. One begins to doubt if it ever happened. I feel like I'm walking in a desert, tired and thirsty, and up ahead I see someone under an umbrella with a chest full of ice cold beer. Thanks Len, don't mind if I do.
http://www.wanttoknow.info/officialsquestion911commissionreport

Len Hart said...

Anonymous said...

The silence on 911 is deafening. One begins to doubt if it ever happened. I feel like I'm walking in a desert, tired and thirsty, and up ahead I see someone under an umbrella with a chest full of ice cold beer.

The 911 culprits, i.e, the 'real killers', sized up the American attention span, the morally supine media, and the goosestepping mindset throughout the increasingly corrupt 'cover-yo-ass' bureaucracy and said to themselves: WE CAN DO THIS AND GET AWAY WITH IT!

We, the people, have let them do it.

Thanks your very welcome comments. As you no doubt know well --anyone daring to get at the truth about 911 is going to take some flack. In my case, I have only to put up with the occasional 'seed pod'! The number of suspicious deaths following the murder of JFK (for example) are way, way 'off-the-scale' statistically speaking. Someone should do similar study with respect to 911. One can be sure that the cover-up is STILL underway.

Again --thanks for your comment and all the great work you have done on this issue. I commend the work you have done on you SUPERB web site.

sr said...

Hi Len. This is my first comment on your blog. Great work!!!

Excuse me for being a little confused. I haven’t kept up on all the details of the airline schedules. If flight 11, the plane that supposedly hit WTC North, never took off do you mean that no such flight was previously scheduled that day, the flight was cancelled, or was the plane that was scheduled to be used on that flight replaced by another at the last moment? It reminds me of that Fox news reporter saying that he didn’t see any windows on one of the WTC jets and some of the plans laid out in the Operation Northwoods document.

Len Hart said...

sr said...

Hi Len. This is my first comment on your blog.

Welcome and thanks for the kind words.

If flight 11, the plane that supposedly hit WTC North, never took off do you mean that no such flight was previously scheduled that day, the flight was cancelled, or was the plane that was scheduled to be used on that flight replaced by another at the last moment?

I have deliberately avoided a detailed hypothesis. If I were prosecuting the alleged 'Arab Terrorists' who are 'said' to have flown said fight et al et al, I would have to construct a detailed timeline to include the fight number, time of takeoff, passengers to INCLUDE those passengers who are 'said' to have hijacked the plane. In other words, I have to place the 'suspects' at the scene of the crime. Bushco never bothered to EVEN put the 'suspects' at the scene of the crime. With respect to the hijackers --there is simply NO EVIDENCE that any of them were ever on board ANY of the flights at ANY time on 911. It's a matter of 'Burden of Proof". Had the so-called 'hijackers' been tracked down (and arrested peacefully)and, further, had they been tried, they would have walked.

It reminds me of that Fox news reporter saying that he didn’t see any windows on one of the WTC jets and some of the plans laid out in the Operation Northwoods document.

You're absolutely correct! Airliners have windows. I cannot recall having seen 'windows' and I have probably seen every frame (via YouTube et al, et al)! If the 'culprit' flights did not have windows, a hijacking can be ruled out.

Most 'conspiracy theorists' fell into a trap following 911! The Bushco propaganda machine hit the ground running and was successful in TARRING critics with the 'label conspiracy theorists' when it was Bushco --Powell, Rummie, et al who put forward and expected all us to believe the most 'outrageous conspiracy theory' of them all, i.e, the 'official' conspiracy theory. I've called it a bad rewrite of the story of Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves.

Bush was, in fact, prosecuting a case in which the role of JURY was played by all Americans, perhaps ever free person on the planet. Like a prosecutor in court, Bushco accused ('charged') a Bin Laden and a gang of hijackers (some of which BBC says were still alive AFTER 911)! In this 'world court of public opinion', Bushco is expected to PROVE its case BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT! Instead, he merely raised scores of additional doubts to say nothing of the verifiable FACTS that utterly disproved EVERY essential facet of his absurd, ludicrous and utterly impossible conspiracy theory.

Thanks for the comment!

LanceThruster said...

Thank you for providing this, Len.

I am always so grateful for thoughtful minds to continue to point out pure unadulterated bullsh!t when they see it.

I was recently banned from the Center for Inquiry forum for expressing my exasperation at their pronounced *lack* of inquisitiveness re: 9/11.

Their main "talking point" was that no one credible refutes the events of 9/11.

Needless to say, I was quite dismissive of such a misrepresentation.

Best regards,

LT

Len Hart said...

LanceThruster said...

Thank you for providing this, Len.

You're most welcome and thanks for posting. You're always welcome here at the corral.

I was recently banned from the Center for Inquiry forum for expressing my exasperation at their pronounced *lack* of inquisitiveness re: 9/11.

Not sure which of TWO groups, these nitwits fall into. Many simple simple morons who have fallen for the OFFICIAL THEORY; these folk actually DENY that Bush's theory (19 hijackers, et al) is a 'theory' and a conspiracy theory at that. But others know better but deny the truth because 'they can't handle the truth!"

ONLY Bush critics --apparently --can be called 'conspiracy theorists' though most --Including myself --have only criticized the OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORY and have, for the most part, refrained from advancing an elaborate theory themselves.

Needless to say, I was quite dismissive of such a misrepresentation.

Kudos! The time has come to take the gloves off! I will promote to the best of my ability any efforts to re-open this case and --of course --first things first!

1) the bush 'theory' IS a conspiracy theory! So --no more rhetoric about 'conspiracy theories'!!!!!

2) BURDEN OF PROOF; Bush advanced a theory but instead of investigating the crime, BUSH THREATENED US! FUCK HIM!

3) Should anyone try to intimidate me for simply demanding a SCINTILLA of evidence that IN ANY WAY support ANYTHING ever said by Bush gets his ass kicked if he should dare to tell me that to my face!

4) I have not yet entered this phase, but there are most certainly violations of Federal Laws that can be chalked up to Bush. I had hoped that some bright lawyers and/or scholars had jumped into this! Seems to me that it is not simply a matter of Bush's complicity in the cover up and commission of several CAPITAL CRIMES, it is a matter of fraud and high treason!

Again, Lance, thanks for posting.

Len Hart said...

Also see: Cornell University Law Library: CONSPIRACY