[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Activism See other Activism Articles Title: IT’S THE TIMING, NOT THE FILM IT’S THE TIMING, NOT THE FILM: New Frames from Pentagon Crash Video Show Langley Embarrassing the 9/11 Truth Movement Jamey Hecht, Ph.D. Senior Staff Writer © Copyright 2006, From The Wilderness Publications, http://www.fromthewilderness.com. All Rights Reserved. May be reprinted, distributed or posted on an Internet web site for non-profit purposes only. May 19, 2006 1000 PST – (FTW) – LOS ANGELES - Today the Pentagon released a few more frames of video from a surveillance camera that recorded the explosion at the Pentagon on 9/11. The alleged rationale for their timing has to do with the Moussaoui trial; showing the video any earlier supposedly would have compromised the proceedings (somehow), but now that he’s been through the system, the frames can be shown. The shorter edit we’ve all been watching for five years does not include these new frames at the beginning, which show the Boeing 757. Or they show an indistinct length of white that instantly disappears into the blooming fireball. Or they show the contrail of a rocket-propelled missile. Or they show an artificially interpolated streak of white pixels. Or they show Superman running at lightning speed. What matters is the propaganda value of releasing this particular document at this particular time. At FTW we feel vindicated. Like John Judge and Mark Robinowitz, we realized very early that the question of Flight 77 would cost everyone more than it was worth. As for what hit the Pentagon, I reckon it was AA77 (I used to think otherwise), but I don’t want to add a line to the impassioned terabytes that have been written on this issue. What’s crucial, from our perspective, is what happens to the legal case for means, motive, and opportunity that Mike Ruppert was the first to construct in Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil. That is the moral heart of the mass murders of 9/11: specific individuals had the means, motive, and opportunity to achieve the horrors in question, and there is more than enough non-physical evidence to convict them in an impartial court. The physical evidence is a snake-pit, no matter what the truth is. Who controls the physical evidence? The scrap metal from the WTC, the black boxes, the debris? Who controls the release or retention of surveillance videotapes? The war machine and its fractious minions at Langley. Arguing about the physical evidence not only divides and exhausts the truth movement, it also links the very question of 9/11 truth to the most vulnerable hypotheses suggested in answer. Why? Because in our War McNews culture, the public’s attention is caught by the more shocking, more absurd, more simplistic stories—no plane hit the Pentagon, no planes hit the towers, holograms, pods, King Kong—whereas only a few literate men and women will take the time to read a lengthy investigation of exactly who did what and when. Now that five years have elapsed, and the very idea of government complicity is popularly associated with the “no-plane” hypothesis, PRESTO! Here are the missing frames of film to confirm that there was no government complicity. It doesn’t matter what the frames actually show. What matters is the talk at the water cooler: “Lee Harvey Oswald Acts Alone, Pilots Boeing 747 Into Pentagon, Caught on Film.” For the logic of physical evidence as a disinformation tool, see Mike Ruppert, “The Kennedys, Physical Evidence, and 9/11,” FTW, November 26, 2003. For a deconstruction of the State Department’s masterful use of this same tool, see Mark Robinowitz, “‘Identifying Misinformation’: The State Department’s Rosetta Stone for understanding 9/11 disinformation promotes 9/11 conspiracy hoaxes while ignoring Crossing the Rubicon and other authentic investigations,” FTW, December 27, 2005. The most complete, rigorous, and elegant history of the “no plane” story is found at Robinowitz’ own website, here: http://www.oilempire.us/bogus.html
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 7.
#5. To: loner (#0)
We may never have sufficient "evidence" to convict anyone as the government, which is the chief suspect (or parts of it) in the alternate conspiracy theory, controls what might constitute evidence. All we can do is review what we have, raise questions, and ask people to be suspicious of a government that not only allows such things to happen (when they were obviously warned in advance and should be prepared for such attacks anyway) but profits enormously from the consequences of the attacks. Who profited the most from the 9/11 attacks - Osama Bin Laden in his "cave" in Afghanistan and the Islamic peoples, or members of our own government and intelligence services and affiliated corporations?
I suggest you read Crossing the Rubicon. Ruppert lays out the circumstantial evidence so well that anyone with a brain can see the administration is guilty of high treason for the crime of mass murder on 9/11.
There are no replies to Comment # 7. End Trace Mode for Comment # 7.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
[Register]
|
||