WHERE THE EVIDENCE
PART 1 of 2
By Lynn Stuter
July 17, 2007
A well-meaning individual sent me a commentary by Raymond Kraft entitled Historical Significance. It touched a nerve by insinuating that anyone who didn’t get behind George W Bush and his “war on terror” was just anti-America, the enemy of America, unpatriotic.
I’ve heard this argument before — if you are against the war, you are against America and aiding the enemy. This is the typical “either you are for us or against us tack,” evidence to the contrary.
Who was behind, who was involved in the events of September 11, 2001 is crucial to all that follows, including the “war” in Iraq and the “war on terror.” As such, it is imperative that we look at the evidence.
Within hours of the events of September 11, 2001, the name of Osama bin Laden and his band of renegade radicals, al Qaeda, was on the lips of most mainstream news anchors. The name of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda are indelibly etched in the minds of Americans. Within days, and through the months that followed, the names and pictures of nineteen of bin Laden’s supposed renegade radicals were paraded before the American public. George W Bush went on record, stating he wanted bin Laden “dead or alive.” The government provided not one shred of evidence that bin Laden and al Qaeda were involved. From the mainstream media blitz, the American people simply assumed that the government had the evidence pointing to bin Laden and al Qaeda.
Then news stories start appearing in mainstream media over seas that some of the individuals named as involved in the hijacking of the four jets were still alive. Despite the two passports of supposed terrorists “found”, one in pristine condition (it miraculously survived the explosion of the plane around it), in and near the WTC complex, the FBI press release makes it apparent that the FBI did not know for sure if these individuals were involved but hasn’t, to this day, changed its list of supposed hijackers. That list went from “we believe” to “that’s them” with little if any supporting evidence.
And questions concerning the government’s official story of events of 9/11 started to surface. It was obvious to a growing number of people that the official story didn’t add up. The anomalies between the official story and what the evidence showed were not answered by the 9/11 Commission, established by the government, which ignored most of the testimony that came before it. There has been no logical answer provided for all the anomalies surrounding the fall of WTC 1, 2, and 7 and the craters that appeared in WTC 6; discussed previously in Reclaiming our Heritage, Twists and Turns, Purdue University Weighs in on WTC Towers Collapse and In Perspective.
If the government had nothing to hide from the American people, it would let the American people see all the evidence instead of parceling out a little evidence here and there but keeping the rest under lock and key.
The latest to throw their hat in the ring of those who do not believe the government’s official story of 9/11 are a group of commercial airline pilots. They have obtained, from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) the flight data information from the black box of the plane that supposedly hit the Pentagon along with an animation produced by the NTSB of American Airlines 77 inbound to the Pentagon. By their calculations, using the flight data information supplied by the NTSB, AA77 over flew the Pentagon by 300 to 400 feet! When questioned about this obvious anomaly, the NTSB had “no comment.” Using the simulation provided by the NTSB, these same pilots determined that the flight path, as constructed by the NTSB, did not conform to the five light poles supposedly toppled by the plane inbound to the Pentagon. Not only this, but the angle of descent did not conform to the five frames released by the FBI showing something at near-ground level streaking across the lawn of the Pentagon. (Source)
Logic supports these pilots. Anyone with any knowledge of large planes and large engines knows that no plane that large can fly that close to the ground, nose down as the NTSB simulation shows, and as would be required if the plane plowed into the ground floor of the Pentagon, as the hole in the Pentagon showed, and not plow into the ground. Anyone who has ever watched a plane that size land knows the plane comes in nose up, lands on its wing wheels first with its nose wheel settling thereafter as the plane slows. If the plane comes in nose down, it will either crash before reaching the runway or crash into the runway.
Then there is the fact that the engines on a plane that large are very powerful, acting like monstrous vacuum cleaners, sucking anything and everything in proximity to those engines, not well anchored, into and through the engines. The point being that if the plane were actually flying as low as has been claimed, what would have been vacuumed into and through those engines would have caused the engines to malfunctioned before the plane got close to the Pentagon. And the prop wash from the engines would have literally tossed the vehicles caught in its wake as well as spewing out bits and pieces of whatever was sucked into and through the engines.
What actually hit the Pentagon leaving a mere 16 foot in diameter entrance hole at ground level, no wreckage, and penetrating nine feet of concrete through three rings (six walls) of the Pentagon? Good question. But the after-effect certainly diverted attention away from the $2,300,000,000,000 (trillion) in Pentagon funds unaccounted for under the leadership of Donald Rumsfeld. Interesting that the part of the Pentagon hit that day housed the computers that held all the information and the civilian accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts who would have investigated where those missing funds went. To this day, five years later, that question has not been answered.
Was 9/11 the work of bin Laden’s renegade band of radicals with box cutters? Not unless they had free run of the World Trade Center complex, which, given bin Laden’s connections to the CIA (see In Perspective), isn’t impossible. Researchers would learn that the head of the New York Port Authority, in charge of security at the WTC complex right up to the day of 9/11, was none other than Marvin Bush, brother of George W Bush.
George W Bush, right after his inauguration in January 2001, ordered that all investigation of bin Laden family members, living in the U.S., cease. With all planes ordered grounded following the events of September 11, 2001, with planes only being allowed to fly with high government-level permission, members of the bin Laden family boarded a jet and left the United States in the days immediately following 9/11. As stated previously, in the days following 9/11, George W Bush vowed to bring bin Laden to justice. In March of 2002, however, Bush went on record stating that bin Laden wasn’t important. If bin Laden wasn’t important in March 2002, it is obvious that he also wasn’t important in September 2001 when Bush and Company fervently placed the blame for 9/11 at his doorstep. For part 2 click below.
Click here for part —–> 2,
© 2007 Lynn M. Stuter – All Rights Reserved
Mother and wife, Stuter has spent the past ten years researching systems theory with a particular emphasis on education. She home schooled two daughters, now grown and on their own. She has worked with legislators, both state and federal, on issues pertaining to systems governance and education reform. She networks nationwide with other researchers and citizens concerned with the transformation of our nation. She has traveled the United States and lived overseas. Web site: www.learn-usa.com E-Mail: email@example.com