by Len Hart, The Existentialist CowboyThere is not a shred of credible and/or admissible evidence to support the Bush administration's official conspiracy theory of 911. The theory is ludicrous on its face --that 19 Arab Hijackers, coordinated from deep inside a cave in the mountains of Tora Bora managed to hijack four commercial airliners with which --it is theorized --they attacked the United States. There is absolutely no evidence to support what is, in fact, a ludicrous, stupid, utterly baseless conspiracy theory.
Right wing partisans concocted it knowing, of course, that Americans have been conditioned by previous GOP regimes to embrace lies and bullshit! At first, it was enough to marginalize critics: just call them conspiracy theorists or truthers. Not merely ludicrous, this is desperate name-calling, a tactic often motivated by guilt and associated with diminishing IQs.
The conclusion consistent with a growing body of peer-reviewed science is this: nothing said by Bush about 911 is true. Secondly, Bushco's ludicrous cover story is the looniest conspiracy since Ali Baba and his 40 thieves! They, too, were 'co-ordinated' from inside a cave but without cell phones! Ali Baba was a thief! Bush, however, is a mass murdering traitor to the people of the United States.
Any theory -especially an 'official' one -must meet certain minimum criteria:
- It must be verifiable!
- Unless it is a revolutionary discovery in the field of physics (like Einstein's Relativity, for example) it must be consistent with the established science of physics.
- It must be consistent with Occam's razor, that is, it must explain rather than raise additional issues or insoluble problems. That's why Einstein's theory survived. It explained. It did not obfuscate. It simplified much of our understanding of the universe by equating gravity with a curvature of space-time.
- It must articulate the 'probable cause' that a crime was committed and the 'probable cause' to begin a specific investigation of suspects not upon 'reasonable suspicion' but 'probable cause'.
- Justify attacks and invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq
- Secure the oil fields of Iraq for the benefit of Bush's 'oil industry sponsors'!
- Justify and attack civil liberties and due process of law in the U.S. as specifically articulated in the U.S. Patriot Act itself, a law that must be utterly repudiated with massive civil disobedience!
(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. --U.S. Codes, Title 18, Section 2441 War crimesThe lies told about 911 are designed to mislead the public and hide from them the truth. 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, specifically the so-called 'Jewish Lobby' which exploits the specter of 'Arab' terrorism to extort BILLIONS from the U.S! 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:
- 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.
Lies about crimes are obstructions of justice. If told under oath they are perjury. Lies about crimes speak to the issue of guilt because lies about crimes are told by the guilty in order to cover up the crime and escape punishment. Only an idiot would order the destruction of evidence if it might clear him/her of charges and/or prove his innocence. A guilty person, on the other hand, is motivated to:
- lie about the crime
- destroy evidence that might convict him
- blame others for his own deeds
- mislead the public
- 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 crimes of 911 with overt and identifiable instances of obstruction of justice, lies, and overt intimidation.
- a new investigation an assessment of verifiable facts not additional baseless assertions
- an insistence upon a theory consistent with established and verified science.
The Worst is Yet to Come It must be pointed out that to posit a 'vaporization theory' is to concede that no fuselage traceable to a 757 was ever recovered; else --why try to why no airliner fuselage was found. Bush proponents are left with facts that utterly destroy their position: there was no fuselage, there was no wreckage, there was no airliner! Bush lied about acts of high treason and mass murder in order to cover them up! There are but two motives to lie about it: a) he is held hostage my the axis of CIA/Mossad; b) he is a willing partner, a traitor, a mass murderer! "Multiplicity ought not to be posited without necessity." A U.S. Global Hawk was, in fact, flown by remote control from the U.S. to Australia completely by remote control. The test was a success. And so too it's lethal and murderous strike on the Pentagon where it deposited and left behind its rotor! Pennsylvania There are photographs of a ditch in PA, a small ditch at that. We are expected to believe that a 757 managed to bury itself via that small ditch. I don't think so! I have bad news for the official theorists and a much better, common sense explanation: a) the ditch was dug by the backhoe clearly seen in photographs of the scene; b) like the Pentagon, there was absolutely no wreckage found that was or is traceable to a 757; c) no --the 757 did not penetrate the earth like a meteorite. Not even meteorites do that. Meteorites break up upon impact, exploding creating a crater. They do not bury themselves into the ground unless the ground is either molten or marshy and the PA was neither. I grew up within ten or twenty minutes of the world's third largest meteor crater near Odessa, TX. Back the in the 30s the University of Texas attempted an expensive retrieval of a 'mass' that was hoped had buried itself beneath just inside the Earth's outer crust. It was hoped that the mass would be found, retrieved, studied. It didn't happen because there was no such large mass.
Most meteorites explode on impact which explains the fact that around a meteorite crater may be found huge chunks of stony-iron meteorites. The Odessa crater, it is believed, is but a fragment of a much larger mass that continued on to crash into Arizona. Briefly --NO! Flight 93 did NOT bury itself beneath the top soil. Neither meteorites nor airliners bury themselves under the soil like a gopher. Both meteorites and airliner leave behind clearly identifiable 'wreckage'! And to those who believe an airliner did a gopher routine in PA, I say: PROVE IT! Dig it up and show me! Otherwise shut up! And, if you happen to be a part of the Bush team, give yourself up and submit to prosecution for accessory to mass murder and high treason! Has anyone put forward an explanation for the existence of the backhoe? There is no other evidence of any other 'work' underway at that location. One must conclude that the backhoe raison d'etre was the creation of a 'ditch' that Bushies could point to and say: Fl 93 buried itself into the earth there! BS!Hijacked Flights Had Been 'Mothballed' There is a cloud of suspicion about all the flights that were said to have been involved with 911. American Airlines itself made an entry on WIKI that none of the AA flights said to have been involved in 911 had been scheduled to fly that day, indeed, had not been scheduled to fly for the previous six months. What does the 'official conspiracy theory' have to say about that? The 'official conspiracy theory' cannot explain why only 'mothballed' flights were was suddenly pressed into 'service' on 911, pressed into service which would result in every one of them being utterly incinerated, vanished, buried in a rabbit hole in PA, or, perhaps beamed into another dimension. As of this date, no one has yet produced a single scrap of wreckage that that has been or is traceable to any of the flights that are 'alleged' to have been involved in the events of 911.
How does the 'official conspiracy theory' explain how flights not scheduled to fly managed to get into the air that day?
The information from AA changes the paradigm by raising compelling doubt that the said flights flew at all! At the very least, the burden of proof is upon Bushco to prove that the flights flew. It is incumbent upon the official conspiracy theorists to explain why the said flight were suddenly taken off the 'no-fly' list on this day of all days! Why? Bushco must explain the timing and the reason for the sudden change! The Spontaneous Collapse of WTC 7 WTC 7 was NOT struck by an airliner yet it collapsed but not before its collapse was reported by a BBC reporter while it was still standing for TV viewers to see still standing behind her as she reported its collapse. If there is an innocent explanation, I have never heard it! Moreover, the collapse of WTC 7 is completely inexplicable and utterly unexplained by Bushco's official conspiracy theory. I suggest that whomever 'leaked' the report to BBC knew that the collapse was imminent. Their timing was bad! With any luck, their timing may yet prove fatal! The 'Buscho Official Conspiracy Theory' is ImpossibleTherefore, it is a lie! Doyle's character Sherlock Holmes said: "When you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains however implausible must be the truth!" The key points of the official conspiracy --the Pentagon Strike, the backhoe ditch in PA --have eliminated essential ingredients of the official lie. I am content to let the work of my friend Dr. David Griffin and Professor Steven Jones address the utter impossibility of the official stories with regard to the Twin Towers. The collapse of wTC 7 is an obvious controlled demolition, the fall of which was reported before it happened. I will venture but one scenario at this point: a US GLOBAL HAWK was programmed to strike the Pentagon. It carried a conventional payload --not a nuclear one. It left behind a 'smoking gun', an engine rotor traceable to a U.S. Global Hawk and it would have been had there been a real investigation.Bushco ordered the destruction of evidence. The destruction of material evidence of a crime IS a crime and should be prosecuted. It has not been as yet but there is no statute of limitations on mass murder, nor, I believe, high treason, nor violations of U.S. Codes, Title 18, Section 2441, war crimes triggered by the events of 911! As most of the evidence has been destroyed upon orders from Bushco, the above approach, I believe, is all that we have left. Keep in mind, however, that the above cited U.S. carry with them the death penalty for violations resulting in death. How many civilians have died in both Afghanistan and Iraq because Bush participated in the events of 911? How U.S. citizens have likewise died because they were ordered to attack and kill Iraqis though Iraq had nothing to do with 911, in fact, had nothing but the oil that was coveted by Dick Cheney's 'Energy Task Force' which met, before 911, for the purpose of carving up the oil fields of Iraq! I ask you: what guilty knowledge would motivate the conspirators if not the guilty knowledge that soon, the U.S. would find a way to be at war with Iraq! In the meantime, evidence that would earn Bush a death sentence was destroyed for the same reasons that EVIDENCE is destroyed in every other cover up of every other crime since crime became profitable. The evidence was removed and ordered destroyed by 'usual suspects', suspect who might have been convicted by it and sentenced to death! Death is motive enough for guilty peole to cover up their crimes, destroy evidence and lie about their crimes! The evidence was ordered destroyed by Bush to protect the guilty. Who BUT the guilty are most motivated to ORDER the destruction of evidence? The corollary is also true: only an IDIOT would order the destruction of evidence IF it would clear him of all charges or, in other ways, prove his innocence. In that scenario --Bush is either GUILTY or he is an idiot. He just wants to you think he's a completely idiot! Never fear, he is smart enough to save his own sorry ass! The demonstrable lies told by this gang of traitors is probable cause to convene an independent Federal Grand Jury that will use the power of the subpoena to 'roundup the usual suspects' --Bush, Cheney, Rummie, Rice, Myers, various Pentagon Brass and Bush partisans inside the CIA. Recall --that Bush Sr was, at one time, director of the CIA and there is evidence he had connections with the CIA at the time of the JFK assassination. It is my hope that a Federal Grand Jury will 'round up the usual suspects', subpoena them, and prosecute them for the lies that will be proven! By law, anyone knowingly spreading Bush's lie with respect to 911 are guilty of obstruction of justice. That surely applies to anyone in the Bush administration which knew better but fell into line and supported the Bush cover story anyone. I urge these people to come forward. A compassionate prosecutor may find it useful to be merciful to anyone willing to tell the truth about how the Bush administration may have conspired and assisted Mossad in a murderous, treasonous attack on the people of the United States. Should one among these traitors cracks and spills the beans so much the better.
SPECIAL TO AmerCIAnassassinations:
Re-posting my articles without my permission and without both byline credit AND a link back is an illegal infringement of copyright and a violation of your Blogger T.O.S. You have done it several times and I will file a formal complaint with Blog Spot. I have often given other bloggers permission to cross-post, excerpt and, in other ways, share links and information. 'Fair use' often covers quoting or citing original or differing sources and, in those cases, a citation and a link back is considerate. In every case, there is reciprocity. I have found at least two of my recent articles in their entirety on the above named site and there is no link back or author credit given. I find this to be an egregious breach of common sense and etiquette. Stop ripping me off!
