|Introduction||What’s With the Goat?||Drug Abuse|
|Blog To Discuss 9/11||What Does This Mean?||Bush Copies Hitler|
|Bush’s Conspiracy Theory||Bush Ties to Terrorists||Whodunit?|
|Preparing Yourself||Motives||What Really Happened|
|Why 9/11 Was an Inside Job||Afghanistan||Conclusion|
|Crossing The Rubicon||History||Audio Links|
|Andrew Johnson Analogy||Mike Delbert Vreeland||Books|
|In A Nutshell||Bush Knew||Roedy’s Related Essays|
|Evidence||Conspiracy Leaks||WebRing Home|
|Why Was Bush Left Vulnerable?||Quotes||Action|
|Why No Planes Scrambled?||Psychosis||What To Do Next|
|Why No Action On Warnings?||Distraction|
The hole in the side of the Pentagon is far too small for Boeing 757 flight 77 to pass through. The wingspan is 124 feet with a fuselage diameter of 13 feet. It is 44 feet from ground to the top of the tail. There was almost no debris, no bodies, no blood, no body parts, no baggage, no wreckage typical of a 757 plane crash, and of course no sheared off wings. Further there was no fire or smoke damage similar to the other two crashes. There should have been. The plane had a similar load of fuel. In contrast, after the shuttle disaster, it was possible to find pieces of the seven astronauts’ bodies spread over hundreds of square miles. Some of the rubble appears to belong to a small Global Hawk drone (44 feet long by 15 feet high) including the tiny engine, including a tiny turbofan engine. The Pentagon blatantly lied in its story published by the Washington Post, saying the hole in the Pentagon was five stories high and 200 feet wide. Photos show it is no bigger than 18 feet in diameter. To fit in that tiny hole the wings had to have been sheared off. Where are the wings? Further the Pentagon crash did not show up seismically, because the object that hit was too light. Recall your high school physics. We know object that hit the Pentagon was travelling at 400 mph.
The low energy of the hit means the object had to have considerably lower mass than a 757. The other two other hits, including another 757, registered seismically. Whatever hit the Pentagon was not nearly heavy enough to be a 757 as the Bush conspiracy theory claims. This is so patently obvious, Bush must have know that all along, but decided to lie.
|recommend book⇒Crossing the Rubicon: 9/11 and the Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil|
|by||Michael C. Ruppert||978-0-86571-540-0||paperback|
|birth||1951 age: 62||978-1-4176-6684-3||hardcover|
|publisher||New Society Publishers||978-1-55092-318-6||eBook|
|Ruppert is an ex-Cop. He builds a solid case that Dick Cheney is the mastermind behind 9/11. See page 280 for a Mike Ruppert’s detailed analysis of why he too thinks Wellstone was murdered.|
|Greyed out stores probably do not have the item in stock. Try looking for it with a bookfinder.|
George W. Bush has also been criticized for behaving somewhat bizarrely on 9/11.
As he and the Secret Service got word that a second plane had crashed into the World Trade Center and that three planes had been hijacked, there could have been no possible doubt in their mind that the United States was under terrorist attack… The most horrendous attack the United States had ever suffered. And they would have had to assume that one or more of them were heading toward George W. Bush himself. and so upon learning about this, the secret service surely would have whisked him away immediately. In fact, one secret service agent on the scene said, We’re out of here. but obviously he got overruled because president Bush stayed there. After Andrew Card reported the second crash on the World Trade Center, the president just nodded as if he understood and said, we’re going to go ahead with the reading lesson. and he sat there another 15 minutes listening to the children read a story about a pet goat. This was a photo op and when it was over he lingered around talking to the children and talking to the teacher.
Bill Sammon, of the Washington Times, wrote a very pro-Bush book, yet he comments how casual and relaxed the president was given the fact he’d just learned the country was under attack. He said Bush took his own sweet time and in fact called him Our Dawdler in Chief. And then the president went on national TV, going forward with an interview that had been planned and announced in advance… then they took their regularly scheduled motorcade back to the airport. In other words, [Bush and the Secret Service] showed no fear whatsoever that they would be targeted for attack, which strongly suggests they knew how many aircraft were being hijacked and what their targets were.
Couldn’t it have been that he was trying to project calm in the eye of the storm, that this was Bush projecting Churchillian resolve in the face of calamity?
People who want to believe such things can, of course, imagine such scenarios. But the president in a situation like that does not make the decisions; the Secret Service team makes the decisions. And the guys in the Secret Service are trained to be ready for a catastrophe like this where they make snap decisions and whisk the president to safety immediately. They would have had an escape route planned; they would have had contingencies planned — they always do. It is at least not very plausible to think they would have remained there and endangered the lives of all the children and teachers at that school in order to exude that Churchillian confidence.
Consider that the event was publicly scheduled and presumably known to any terrorists. A school is not a very secure location. Bush was recklessly endangering the lives of the children he was with unless of course he knew there was no danger because this was an inside job.
I expected to go back to a round of meetings [on 2001-09-12], examining what the next attacks could be, what our vulnerabilities were, what we could do about them in the short term. Instead, I walked into a series of discussions about Iraq. At first I was incredulous that we were talking about something other than getting al Qaeda. Then I realised with an almost sharp physical pain that Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz were trying to take advantage of this national tragedy to promote their agenda about Iraq. Since the beginning of the administration, indeed well before, they had been pressing for a war with Iraq. My friends in the Pentagon had been telling me that the word was we would be invading Iraq sometimes in 2002.
~ Richard A. Clarke (born: 1951 age: 62), White House Counter Terrorism Chief, Against All Enemies
Here we’re talking about plastic knives, and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building, and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center.
~ Donald Rumsfeld (born: 1932-07-09 age: 81), secretary of War, 2001-10-12 Parade Magazine interview.
We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th attacks.
~ George W. Bush (born: 1946-07-06 age: 67), 2003-09-17.
available on the web at:
optional Replicator mirror
Please email your feedback for publication, letters to the editor, errors, omissions, typos, formatting errors, ambiguities, unclear wording, broken/redirected link reports, suggestions to improve this page or comments to Roedy Green : . If you want your message, your name or email kept confidential, not considered for public posting, please explicitly specify that. Unless you state otherwise, I will treat your message as a letter to the editor that I may or may not publish in the feedback section. After that, it will be too late to retract it. If you disagree with something I said, especially when sending an ad-hominem attack, a rant composed mainly of obscenities or a death threat, please quote the offending passage and cite the web page where you found it, tell me why you think it is wrong, and, if possible, provide some supporting evidence. I can’t very well fix erroneous or ambiguous text if I can’t find it.
Your face IP:[22.214.171.124]
|Feedback||You are visitor number 115,287.|