Bruecke Note: Mr. Lawson does do a good job of stating in this year old article how the US govt has never made a conclusive case for the commercial planes supposedly hijacked on 9/11. I have issues with Mr. Lawson in other areas of 9/11, because he is known for doing ad homenim rounds with "no-planes", "video fakery", and "pilots for 9/11 Truth" in various forums, like Veterans for 9/11 Truth. Gee, no-planes is one of the trick ponies I ride as a 9/11 Troofer!
I’ve jumped back-and-forth over the video forgery fence, I don’t know what I believe today except some degree of video manipulation happened, just like editors regularly photoshop already pretty women into being unrealistically drop-dead georgous in magazines. Such enhancements, like inserting pixels of planes into some footage that may not have depicted planes with more shock-and-awe, doesn’t prove that all video footage was faked and that no planes hit the towers. What it does prove is a complicit corporate media to allow for (or actively edit) such fakes to be aired.
Were corporate media not complicit, we wouldn’t be doing our September Clues analysis on poorly recorded broadcast footage complete with oversize banners and footers. No, corporate media would have opened their vaults and provided the raw footage long ago to settle the issue. They didn’t, just like the FBI never released the 85 tapes they confiscated of cameras around the Pentagon. They all have something to hide.
At any rate, Mr. Lawson wrote the following article prior to his new premise that "enhanced 767's", as opposed to "standard commercial 767" were deployed, because this accounts for the velocities at a quarter mile above sea level (with more air resistance) that were above their rated maximum at high altitude, should have made the planes very difficult to control and target, and could have torn the planes apart, in addition to (some) additional strength attributed to more cutting of building steel by the plane.
I'm such a duped useful idiot, I can buy this AND video fakery. Maybe enhanced planes were used, and an early example of complicit corporate media involvement is in the photoshopped & enhanced pictures and videos in a beautifying effort to put lipstick on this 9/11 pig for a better shock-and-awe Hollywood-esque story.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2010/03/a-little-known-fact-about-the-911-planes/
By: Anthony Lawson
Date: 2010-03-19
It is not a theory but a fact — one that is well known within the 9/11 truth movement — that the 9/11 Commission failed to ensure that at least one of the appropriate government agencies: the NTSB, the FBI or the FAA was commissioned to positively identify the aircraft which were allegedly involved in the murders of nearly 3,000 people, on September 11, 2001.
One does not need to be a Harvard Law School graduate to know that the first and most important requirement in any murder investigation is to determine the cause of death, which often leads to a requirement to identify, and trace to its origins, a murder weapon, or, in the case of 9/11: weapons. And there can be no doubt that each of the four planes which were allegedly hijacked on the morning of 9/11 was posited as being a murder weapon by the U.S. administration and the 9/11 Commission, yet there is absolutely nothing which firmly connects the four allegedly-hijacked planes to any of the 9/11 crash sites.
In fact, it is not fanciful to suggest that if a lawyer, even of a far lower calibre than that of an Alan Dershowitz, were engaged to defend the airport security companies that allegedly allowed 19 box-cutter-carrying Arabs to get on to those planes, he would immediately call for the dismissal of such an action on the grounds that the planes which allegedly hit the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the one which crashed near Shanksville had never been forensically identified as the planes which, allegedly, had been hijacked that morning.
And such a motion could not possibly be denied, as I will explain.
The planes in question were alleged to have been: American Airlines flight 11 (Tail Number: N334AA), North Tower; United Airlines flight 175 (N612UA), South Tower; American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA), the Pentagon, and United Airlines flight 93 (N591UA), which supposedly crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. But the truth is that they could well have been different planes that had arrived on the scenes from quite different locations, because the crash debris recovered from those four crash sites has never been forensically linked to the planes that allegedly took off from Logan International, Boston; Dulles International, Washington and Newark International, New Jersey, and which were, allegedly, hijacked shortly thereafter. Therefore, they cannot possibly be linked, without a reasonable doubt, to breaches of security at those airports.
So it would be a remarkable irony, and quite possibly a unique circumstance in the annals of American jurisprudence, if the assumptions used as reasons for launching wars against two sovereign nations, as well as the more generalised ‘War on Terror’ would not stand up as evidence in either a criminal prosecution or a civil damages suit in an American court of law.
Air-crash investigations in the United States are normally carried out by the NTSB’s air accident investigation division, and there are several documentary television series featuring this government agency’s painstaking approach when investigating the causes of air crashes. During many such investigations, serial numbers from recovered parts are cross checked with the airline-in-question’s purchase and maintenance records, to try and identify the reason for an accident, when it is suspected that mechanical failure may have been the cause.
However, the NTSB has confirmed that — apparently for the first time from its inception, in 1967, since when it has investigated more than 124,000 other aviation accidents — it took no part in investigating any of the air crashes which occurred on September 11, 2001. So the world has been asked to take it on faith and hearsay that the four planes involved were normal scheduled flights which were hijacked by Arab terrorists, some of whom, are, allegedly, still alive.
Even more disturbing is the fact that documentation exists, and is available on the Internet, which indicates that the FBI, backed up by a separate letter from the Justice Department, has refused to release any information under the Freedom of Information Act about any debris recovered from the crash sites, including the serial number of the “Black Box” Cockpit Flight Data Recorder allegedly found near the alleged crash site of United Airlines Flight 93. It may be recalled that a transcript taken from this recorder formed the basis for several TV dramas and one Academy-Award winning feature film.
By no means finally, but just as disturbing, the core of a jet engine, which can be seen in several 9/11 videos falling out of the northern face of the WTC’s South Tower, and which hit a building on its way down, and was photographed and videoed — in the presence of FBI personnel and at least one FBI vehicle — where it came to rest at the junction of Church and Murray streets, was later photographed, prior to its [alleged] burial in a land fill on Staten Island. So much for what murder investigators are usually so concerned about: The chain of custody and preservation of important evidence, pending its identification.
The events of 9/11 had consequences far beyond the destruction of life and property in the United States; they were the reasons for the launching of three wars. Yet it is obvious that a leader writer of an influential newspaper, the Washington Post, could not spare the time to look into such a serious matter — one that people with far fewer resources than he or she has access to have managed to do — before launching a scathing attack on a member of the Japanese parliament and the world-wide 9/11 truth movement, in general.
Just because the 9/11 Commission did not do its job properly is no excuse for newspaper writers not to do theirs. Unless, of course, newspapers such as the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times are playing a conscious role in a conspiracy to prevent the truth about these events from surfacing. In which case their editors and owners would almost certainly be guilty of misprision of felony.
I would like to stress that the identity of the planes is not the only reason why the 9/11 Commission’s findings should be regarded as invalid, and its members found guilty, at the very least, of gross oversights in the collection of the evidence which was used in the writing of its Final Report. Even a cursory look at the visual evidence of the collapsing World Trade Center’s Twin Towers and WTC 7 should have instilled grave doubts about the findings of some of the experts from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST.
But, for my money, the real smoking guns were, and still are, the four aircraft that were used as weapons on that terrible day, and for them not to have been identified breaks every rule in any book which seeks to teach the art of solving crimes.
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
I’ve jumped back-and-forth over the video forgery fence, I don’t know what I believe today except some degree of video manipulation happened, just like editors regularly photoshop already pretty women into being unrealistically drop-dead georgous in magazines. Such enhancements, like inserting pixels of planes into some footage that may not have depicted planes with more shock-and-awe, doesn’t prove that all video footage was faked and that no planes hit the towers. What it does prove is a complicit corporate media to allow for (or actively edit) such fakes to be aired.
Were corporate media not complicit, we wouldn’t be doing our September Clues analysis on poorly recorded broadcast footage complete with oversize banners and footers. No, corporate media would have opened their vaults and provided the raw footage long ago to settle the issue. They didn’t, just like the FBI never released the 85 tapes they confiscated of cameras around the Pentagon. They all have something to hide.
At any rate, Mr. Lawson wrote the following article prior to his new premise that "enhanced 767's", as opposed to "standard commercial 767" were deployed, because this accounts for the velocities at a quarter mile above sea level (with more air resistance) that were above their rated maximum at high altitude, should have made the planes very difficult to control and target, and could have torn the planes apart, in addition to (some) additional strength attributed to more cutting of building steel by the plane.
I'm such a duped useful idiot, I can buy this AND video fakery. Maybe enhanced planes were used, and an early example of complicit corporate media involvement is in the photoshopped & enhanced pictures and videos in a beautifying effort to put lipstick on this 9/11 pig for a better shock-and-awe Hollywood-esque story.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2010/03/a-little-known-fact-about-the-911-planes/
By: Anthony Lawson
Date: 2010-03-19
It is not a theory but a fact — one that is well known within the 9/11 truth movement — that the 9/11 Commission failed to ensure that at least one of the appropriate government agencies: the NTSB, the FBI or the FAA was commissioned to positively identify the aircraft which were allegedly involved in the murders of nearly 3,000 people, on September 11, 2001.
One does not need to be a Harvard Law School graduate to know that the first and most important requirement in any murder investigation is to determine the cause of death, which often leads to a requirement to identify, and trace to its origins, a murder weapon, or, in the case of 9/11: weapons. And there can be no doubt that each of the four planes which were allegedly hijacked on the morning of 9/11 was posited as being a murder weapon by the U.S. administration and the 9/11 Commission, yet there is absolutely nothing which firmly connects the four allegedly-hijacked planes to any of the 9/11 crash sites.
In fact, it is not fanciful to suggest that if a lawyer, even of a far lower calibre than that of an Alan Dershowitz, were engaged to defend the airport security companies that allegedly allowed 19 box-cutter-carrying Arabs to get on to those planes, he would immediately call for the dismissal of such an action on the grounds that the planes which allegedly hit the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the one which crashed near Shanksville had never been forensically identified as the planes which, allegedly, had been hijacked that morning.
And such a motion could not possibly be denied, as I will explain.
The planes in question were alleged to have been: American Airlines flight 11 (Tail Number: N334AA), North Tower; United Airlines flight 175 (N612UA), South Tower; American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA), the Pentagon, and United Airlines flight 93 (N591UA), which supposedly crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. But the truth is that they could well have been different planes that had arrived on the scenes from quite different locations, because the crash debris recovered from those four crash sites has never been forensically linked to the planes that allegedly took off from Logan International, Boston; Dulles International, Washington and Newark International, New Jersey, and which were, allegedly, hijacked shortly thereafter. Therefore, they cannot possibly be linked, without a reasonable doubt, to breaches of security at those airports.
So it would be a remarkable irony, and quite possibly a unique circumstance in the annals of American jurisprudence, if the assumptions used as reasons for launching wars against two sovereign nations, as well as the more generalised ‘War on Terror’ would not stand up as evidence in either a criminal prosecution or a civil damages suit in an American court of law.
Air-crash investigations in the United States are normally carried out by the NTSB’s air accident investigation division, and there are several documentary television series featuring this government agency’s painstaking approach when investigating the causes of air crashes. During many such investigations, serial numbers from recovered parts are cross checked with the airline-in-question’s purchase and maintenance records, to try and identify the reason for an accident, when it is suspected that mechanical failure may have been the cause.
However, the NTSB has confirmed that — apparently for the first time from its inception, in 1967, since when it has investigated more than 124,000 other aviation accidents — it took no part in investigating any of the air crashes which occurred on September 11, 2001. So the world has been asked to take it on faith and hearsay that the four planes involved were normal scheduled flights which were hijacked by Arab terrorists, some of whom, are, allegedly, still alive.
Even more disturbing is the fact that documentation exists, and is available on the Internet, which indicates that the FBI, backed up by a separate letter from the Justice Department, has refused to release any information under the Freedom of Information Act about any debris recovered from the crash sites, including the serial number of the “Black Box” Cockpit Flight Data Recorder allegedly found near the alleged crash site of United Airlines Flight 93. It may be recalled that a transcript taken from this recorder formed the basis for several TV dramas and one Academy-Award winning feature film.
By no means finally, but just as disturbing, the core of a jet engine, which can be seen in several 9/11 videos falling out of the northern face of the WTC’s South Tower, and which hit a building on its way down, and was photographed and videoed — in the presence of FBI personnel and at least one FBI vehicle — where it came to rest at the junction of Church and Murray streets, was later photographed, prior to its [alleged] burial in a land fill on Staten Island. So much for what murder investigators are usually so concerned about: The chain of custody and preservation of important evidence, pending its identification.
The events of 9/11 had consequences far beyond the destruction of life and property in the United States; they were the reasons for the launching of three wars. Yet it is obvious that a leader writer of an influential newspaper, the Washington Post, could not spare the time to look into such a serious matter — one that people with far fewer resources than he or she has access to have managed to do — before launching a scathing attack on a member of the Japanese parliament and the world-wide 9/11 truth movement, in general.
Just because the 9/11 Commission did not do its job properly is no excuse for newspaper writers not to do theirs. Unless, of course, newspapers such as the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times are playing a conscious role in a conspiracy to prevent the truth about these events from surfacing. In which case their editors and owners would almost certainly be guilty of misprision of felony.
I would like to stress that the identity of the planes is not the only reason why the 9/11 Commission’s findings should be regarded as invalid, and its members found guilty, at the very least, of gross oversights in the collection of the evidence which was used in the writing of its Final Report. Even a cursory look at the visual evidence of the collapsing World Trade Center’s Twin Towers and WTC 7 should have instilled grave doubts about the findings of some of the experts from the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST.
But, for my money, the real smoking guns were, and still are, the four aircraft that were used as weapons on that terrible day, and for them not to have been identified breaks every rule in any book which seeks to teach the art of solving crimes.
The article is reproduced in accordance with Section 107 of title 17 of the Copyright Law of the United States relating to fair-use and is for the purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Vatic Clerk Tips: After 7 days, all comments to an article go into the moderation queue for approval which happens at least once a day. Please be patient.
Be respectful in your comments, keeping in mind that these discussions will become the Zeitgeist of our time that future database archeologists will discover. Make your comments worthy and on the founding father's level in their respectfulness, reasoning, and sound argumentation. Prove we weren't all idiots in our day and age. Comments that advocate sedition or violence are not encouraged. Racist, ad hominem, and troll-baiting comments might never see the light of day.