Het laden…
Enkele Buitensporige Leugens over 9/11
|
|
Door Joseph A. Lopisi
It is moeilijk om een plaats te plukken om in termen van het spreken over de meest buitensporige leugens te beginnen die het beleid van Bush en de 9/11 Commissie aan de mensen in dit land als reden hebben voorgesteld om Afghanistan en Irak aan te vallen en een „valse oorlog op verschrikking“ te lanceren.
De reden die ik dit is heb gezegd dat ik gelezen=heb= artikelen en gelet op video's over de leugens en de teleurstellingen die omringen 9/11 in de afgelopen drie jaar. If anything, there are so many obvious unanswered questions about 9/11. However, not only has no one answered any of these questions but in fact no one in the mainstream media nor anyone in the United States Congress except for Representative Kucinich and Cynthia McKinney have even asked these questions.
Some of these questions are:
1. How is it that at the crash site of Flight 93, NBC and Fox News on September 11, 2001 reported on the scene with video coverage that there was no sign of a jetliner, engines, bodies or luggage? You can go to my website which is www.911insidejob.net and watch this video report which is on my home page. It has never been shown again on the mainstream media.
2. How is it that three steel framed buildings on September 11, 2001 fell in freefall time on their footprint? If you watch the two Towers collapse, it is obvious that they are being blown up. No steel framed building prior to this date or after this date has ever collapsed due to fire. Many steel framed buildings have experienced burning infernos for many hours and never collapsed. WTC 7, a 50 story steel framed building, had two small fires in it with no noticeable structural damage when it collapsed on his footprint in freefall time at about 5:40 p.m. on September 11. You can watch this building collapse on the homepage my website.
3. How is it that the most protected building in the world, the Pentagon, was hit by a commercial jetliner that was being tracked by Vice President Cheney in the basement of the White House for over one hour? Transportation Secretary Mineta testified under oath that he witnessed a member of the United States military ask Vice President Cheney several times whether the order still stood relative to not shooting down the oncoming plane. Vice President Cheney’s answer was that the order still stands. You can watch Secretary Mineta’s testimony on the home page of my website. The Pentagon is protected by a battery of antiaircraft guns that would automatically shoot down any plane that does not have a United States military transponder on it.
4. How is it that only five frames have been presented by this government to show supposedly what hit the Pentagon on that date. The Pentagon has surveillance cameras ringing the top exterior ring of the building. The FBI within 10 minutes of the attack were confiscating surveillance films from local businesses around the Pentagon. None of these confiscated surveillance films have been released. I would bet that a satellite sits above Washington, DC 24 hours every day and would have very good video images showing what hit the Pentagon.
5. How is it that a large commercial jetliner was able to crash into the first floor of the Pentagon and punch a round hole through three rings of the Pentagon which is constructed of steel reinforced concrete? The nose of a commercial jetliner is made of aluminum.
6. Why is it that Jamie McIntyre of CNN reported on the front lawn of the Pentagon on September 11 that from his vantage point it did not look like a commercial jetliner had crashed into the Pentagon? Why is it that this report has never been shown on mainstream media but can be seen on my website? Why is it that we have not heard another word from Jamie McIntyre or CNN regarding this report?
7. How was it that four commercial airliners were able to roam at will the northeastern sector of the United States without being intercepted? Of course, Flight 93 was intercepted and shot down by the US military. The northeastern sector of the United States is the most protected airspace in the world. There are several Air Force bases very close to Washington, DC and no jets from these Air Force bases came close to intercepting the plane that hit the Pentagon, despite the fact that Vice President Cheney knew the plane was heading towards Washington, DC for almost an hour.
I could go on and on but I will leave that to those who consider the truth about what happened on 9/11 to be important. You can go to my website or many other 9/11 websites and start reading about how outrageous the official 9/11 story is. You can go to www.youtube.com and watch five videos that I have produced under my call name which is “bushguiltyof911″.
Vice President Cheney met with the heads of the various oil companies right after Bush took office. When the public wanted to know who was there and what they were talking about, Vice President Cheney fought this request to the United States Supreme Court (the same court that elected George Bush in 2000) where he won. They were talking about attacking Iraq in order to gain control of their oil fields. They were talking about attacking Afghanistan to take over the construction of a gas pipeline through Afghanistan. The Taliban, prior to September 11, 2001, had already said no to the Bush administration’s request that an American company, Unical, construct the gas pipeline and in response President Bush said to the Taliban that the United States would attack them in October 2001. We did.
The Bush administration’s purpose in planning and orchestrating 9/11 was to create an atmosphere of fear in this country so that the military/industrial/oil/private central banking complex could start their fake war on terror which included attacking Afghanistan and Iraq and probably Iran in the near future. None of this would have been possible without the United States Congress and the corporately owned mainstream media being complicit in so far as not questioning the official 9/11 conspiracy theory but in fact labeling anyone who does question the official 9/11 conspiracy theory as a “conspiracy nut”.
Why is it that neither the United States Congress nor the mainstream media question the counting of our votes by electronic voting machines made by companies owned and controlled by neoconservative Republicans? It has been shown extensively and publicly that these electronic voting machines are completely hackable, even remotely, by a high school student. Nevertheless, these machines count approximately 80% of our votes. Why is it that the United States Congress does not require the manufacturers of these machines to make the internal software available for inspection by us before and after these machines count our votes.
Why is it that only Ron Paul speaks out about the scam of the Federal Reserve Bank? Go to my website where I have several streaming videos on my homepage that simply and clearly explain the scam that the Federal Reserve Bank perpetrates on all of us and has done so since its creation. What they call a “business cycle” is actually an intentional manipulation of the money supply for the sole benefit of the cartel of private banks that own the Federal Reserve Bank. The Federal Reserve Bank prints money and then lends it to this government at interest. Much of our income tax payments go to paying the interest on this loan of paper money that has no backing.
We must not vote for anyone who does not speak out about the lies and deceptions regarding 9/11, the removal of all electronic voting machines from the election process and the termination of the Federal Reserve Bank. Of course, there must be term limits and only public financing of national elections.
Joseph A. Lopisi is an attorney and the webmaster of www.911insidejob.net. He is the cofounder of the Massachusetts 9/11 Truth Group and is a member of the Coalition against Election Fraud. You can contact him through the e-mail function on his website.
False Flag Section has more related reportsHelp keep RINF going..Comment on 'Some Of The Outrageous Lies About 9/11' :
19 Responses to “Some Of The Outrageous Lies About 9/11”
-
pingback:
Posted:
Feb 9th, 2008
At 10:35 amSome Of The Outrageous Lies About 9/11 « Dr Nasir Khan -
Robert Hoogenboom
Posted:
Feb 9th, 2008
At 10:37 amReplyThanks, Joseph!
Here’s another one for you to consider, the videos of the plane flying into the second twin tower, broadcast by the media as though they were authentic, are fake. One, a so-called “live” broadcast of the plane flying into the tower, shows the plane going through the building and come out the other side; what’s more, nose intact - an utter absurdity. In another video, shown in the evening, a sequence that had actually been broadcast live in the morning had been doctored, with much of the sky and New York City skyline and buildings removed, and the flight of a plane of a plane super-imposed, a plane that was not there in the earlier showing of that same sequence. A researcher called Ace Baker has actually analysed this sequence frame by frame and has found that if you make the scenery of the tower and the background exactly coincide frame by frame, the flight of the plane does not steady accordingly by becomes more chaotic, meaning that it was shot with a different (hand-held) camera and super-imposed. A third video shows the plane disappearing into the building, at an angle, like a knife goes into butter: no slowing down and loss of momentum, nothing breaking off, and creating a hole which is well-nigh equal to itself (with the wall closing up again over the right wing!) A real plane, being made mainly of aluminium, would have smashed to bits against the steel lattice and the concrete of the wall, and against the horizontal floor, which it would have had to plough through. Moreover, it would have most likely burst into flames, and then falling straight down onto the grounds.
The video of the first plane, so-called shot by the Gaudet brothers, also doesn’t seem authentic. The “plane” covers too few frames in the video, and it is said that the FBI had that video in its possession for at least a day before it was given back.
Look all of this up in YouTube. You will find many film clips discussing this issue of the fake videos.
I am claiming nothing else: Those videos of planes flying into the twin towers are fake!Sydney, Australia
-
pingback:
Posted:
Feb 9th, 2008
At 10:43 amSome Of The Outrageous Lies About 9/11 « Suzie-Q Reply[…] Keep reading . . . […]
-
roman
Posted:
Feb 9th, 2008
At 11:12 amReplyThere is no need for more conspiratorial proof on the 9/11 fiasco.
Whats required is for the American people to rise up against Bush and co., and serve them up their just desserts. The world is waiting… -
b. j. edwards
Posted:
Feb 9th, 2008
At 12:57 pmReplyIt’s instructive of your 9/11 Denial Movement, that every one of those questions above have been repeatedly debunked years ago. That this author is either too dumb to look up the answers or is intentionally lying shows us that the 9/11 Denial Movement is nothing but a house of cards that will collapse as debris on top of the existing pile of other denial movement debris, like Holocaust denial.
Eventually you are going to have to grow up and stop reposting pathetic nonsense.
Amazing.
-
Indigo
Posted:
Feb 9th, 2008
At 9:45 pmReplyb. j. edwards
Can you please provide evidence to support your claims?
I doubt you can.
-
Robert Hoogenboom
Posted:
Feb 9th, 2008
At 11:11 pmReplyb,j, edwards,
Those questions haven’t been debunked.
Sydney, Australia
-
nathan
Posted:
Feb 10th, 2008
At 12:17 pmReplythe person here has clearly given you questions that you say have been ‘debunked’, and if that is true it should be easy for you to ‘debunk’ them or at least give us a website or an article where we can go for research.
keep in mind that people who understand that we have been lied to have done days worth research and are open-minded and willing to look at real information on the subject
-
Stan
Posted:
Feb 10th, 2008
At 1:53 pmReplyHe is only posting here to promote his bullshit blog nobody reads.
-
b. j. edwards
Posted:
Feb 10th, 2008
At 3:51 pmReplyI always find it astonishing that 9/11 Truthers have never had any exposure to critical thinking such that they will uncritically and willingly accept debunked claims and NEVER bothering to question those claims and do their own research. Apparently, you have never considered that people like Joseph A. Lopisi KNOW that they have you as willing sheep and are using YOU.
It is really is quite amazing.
So I’ll do one at a time. Starting with claim #1:
“1. How is it that at the crash site of Flight 93, NBC and Fox News on September 11, 2001 reported on the scene with video coverage that there was no sign of a jetliner, engines, bodies or luggage?”
Now look at exactly what he is asking you to believe: that a news report on the very day of the crash, long before work had begun to recover the bodies and wreckage should be considered as evidence of no crash and we should STILL be asking questions about it? Who amongst you would seriously entertain that claim? Do you understand that workers and recovery crews arrived later and spent a considerable amount of time digging? Do you believe that there are NOT multiple lines of evidence pointing to the certainty of UA 93’s crash?
See:
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page3
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/flight93page1
http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/ -
troofers are the new geeks
Posted:
Feb 10th, 2008
At 6:30 pmReplyhey b. j. edwards are you one of those crazy no planers or one of those crazy infowars sheep?
theres some of us who dont fall for either extreames and support a new investigation into 911.
-
b. j. edwards
Posted:
Feb 10th, 2008
At 7:04 pmReplyI’m just a rational person, geeks, who goes after ALL of the frauds and charlatans of the 9/11 Denial Movement like the author of the above article. How you could possibly think I have anything to do with that movement in any way possible shows me you are clueless as the above commenters are.
The burden of proof is on you guys to come up with the evidence to refute the MASSIVE evidence against your claims. After six years, we still have charlatans like Joseph Lopisi above who have nothing to show other than debunked nonsense.
If you think anyone will ever conduct another 9/11 investigation without reason, you’re sadly deluded.
-
nathan
Posted:
Feb 11th, 2008
At 2:59 amReplybj do you work for the government
-
ctestawich
Posted:
Feb 11th, 2008
At 12:41 pmReplyI never understood while reading these kinds of blogs, there are always people who go out of their way to leave a comment like “Your a conspiracy wacko / No one will read your blog / Provide evidence…” Provide evidence is my favorite. All alot of people out there want is more evidence to back up the gov’ts story, show us some of those cameras that were set up around the Pentagon. Even a 10 second clip could silaece alot of critics but they don’t show it out of national security or something. Clips of hijackers gettin on planes something. The way I am trying to look at it, is pretend you were in a coma and missed 9/11.. what kinds of questions would you ask as a person tryin to figure out what happened and why America is in a war across seas… (as a Canadian we rae still wondering how the hell we got into Afghanistan, a war we didnt start and most of us didnt want to go into…) Most of these people want to be proven wrong and are open to the idea that they could be wrong so why redicule them for questioning the powers that be (esp, when they admit they lied to get into Afghanistan/Iraq)? I thought your guys country was founded on such reasoning. Peace to my brothers and sisters in America. I kinda hope I get flamed.
-
ctestawich
Posted:
Feb 11th, 2008
At 12:45 pmReplyDo some people go out of their way to go to site to site and blog to blog to leave “You guys are wackos” comments? lol
“I’ll just check out this page cause it says “Some of the Outrageous Lies About 9/11″ and ridicule whomever wrote it! HA HA HA! THERE! My comment shall stifle any efforts you have to coerse the people into outrageous thinking! I am making the world a better place!”
-
b. j. edwards
Posted:
Feb 11th, 2008
At 7:33 pmReply” Provide evidence is my favorite. All alot of people out there want is more evidence to back up the gov’ts story, show us some of those cameras that were set up around the Pentagon. Even a 10 second clip could silaece alot of critics but they don’t show it out of national security or something.”
Why do you think you need a video or picture of AA 77 hitting the Pentagon? Are you willing to ignore every other bit of evidence, including the wreckage found inside the pentagon, and the over 1,000 people who either saw and/or recovered that wreckage? Those very people who have never contested that the wreckage was from a Boeing 757?
The “need” for a video or photograph of AA 77 is just another 9/11 Denial Movement strawman to hide behind so they won’t have to deal with the massive evidence that ALL converges on the what we know is true: AA 77 hit the Pentagon.
We didn’t need photographs or videos to know the Titanic sank and with AA 77 we have far more evidence.
The 9/11 Truth Movement has hidden behind the “we are just asking questions” canard while studiously avoiding the answers it doesn’t want to hear. The burden of proof remains on those who claim 9/11 was an inside job. You can’t ignore that fact.
-
b. j. edwards
Posted:
Feb 11th, 2008
At 7:36 pmReply“bj do you work for the government”
LOL. No. Your question is just indicative of another favorite illogical canard of 9/11 Truthers.
You don’t even have a clue why you asked that silly question.
-
b. j. edwards
Posted:
Feb 11th, 2008
At 7:54 pmReplyWell, since no one contests the fact that Flight 93 did crash and there was wreckage, let’s move on to question #2:
“2. How is it that three steel framed buildings on September 11, 2001 fell in freefall time on their footprint?”
This is an old falsehood. None of the towers fell in “freefall” time. None actually fell in their “footprints”. WTC 7 was leaning and completely destroyed a neighboring building, Manhattan Community College’s Fiterman Hall building. The Verizon Building suffered $1.4 billion in damage from WTC 7’s collapse. It took about 14 seconds for the FULL collapase of WTC 7.
“If you watch the two Towers collapse, it is obvious that they are being blown up.”
Who says? This is just another assertion made without evidence. The writer cannot even show us what an uncontrolled demolition is SUPPOSED to or not supposed to ook like nor provide any such example.”
“No steel framed building prior to this date or after this date has ever collapsed due to fire.”
Blatantly false and stupid. Hundreds of steel-frame buildings collapsed due fire during World War II. Just look at the exhibits at The Edo Museum in Tokyo, London’s Imperial War Museum, and Dresden’s City Historical Museum .
“Many steel framed buildings have experienced burning infernos for many hours and never collapsed.”
With concrete cores. Or never damaged. Or never burning WITHOUT firemen fighting it.
“WTC 7, a 50 story steel framed building, had two small fires in it with no noticeable structural damage when it collapsed on his footprint in freefall time at about 5:40 p.m. on September 11.”
Amazing. FOUR lies in one sentence. And you believe this fraud? There were many fires burning throughout the building for SEVEN hours, with no water to fight them, helped long by a ruptured diesel fuel tank, in a structure that suffered severe structural damage on its South Side, that collapsed at a slight angle after fire had weakened the remaining structural steel that was forced to take on the additional structural load from the damaged side and did not fall in its own footprint.
How could any of you praise this fraud and liar, Joseph A. Lopisi?
-
Englishman
Posted:
Feb 12th, 2008
At 3:37 amReplyNice work.
Keep fighting, keep spreading the word.
It’s appreciated.
Related News:
[…] Keep reading . . . […]