This is a story about a little white lie that bred dozens of
other little white lies, then hundreds of bigger white lies and so on, to the
point where the first little white lie must be credited as the “Mother of All
Lies” about events on 11 September 2001. For this was the little white lie that
first activated the American psyche, generated mass loathing, and enabled media
manipulation of the global population.
Without this little white lie there would have been no Arab Hijackers, no Osama
Bin Laden directing operations from afar, and no “War on Terror” in Afghanistan
and occupied Palestine. Clearly the lie was so clever and diabolical in nature,
it must have been generated by the “Power Elite” in one of its more earthly
manifestations. Perhaps it was the work of the Council on Foreign Relations, or
the Trilateral Commission?
No, it was not. Though at the time the little white lie was
flagged with a powerful political name, there was and remains no evidence to
support the connection. Just like the corrupt and premature Lee Harvey Oswald
story in 1963, there are verifiable fatal errors which ultimately prove the
little white lie was solely the work of members of the media. Only they had
access, and only they had the methods and means.
The little white lie was about Barbara Olson, a conservative
commentator for CNN and wife of US Solicitor General Ted Olson. Now deceased,
Mrs Olson is alleged to have twice called her husband from an American Airlines
Flight 77 seat-telephone, before the aircraft slammed into the Pentagon. This
unsubstantiated claim, reported by CNN remarkably quickly at 2.06 am EDT [0606
GMT] on September 12, was the solitary foundation on which the spurious
“Hijacker” story was built.
Without the “eminent” Barbara Olson and her alleged emotional telephone calls,
there would never be any proof that humans played a role in the hijack and
destruction of the four aircraft that day. Lookalike claims surfaced several
days later on September 16 about passenger Todd Beamer and others, but it is
critically important to remember here that the Barbara Olson story was the only
one on September 11 and. 12. It was beyond question the artificial “seed” that
started the media snowball rolling down the hill.
And once the snowball started rolling down the hill, it artfully
picked up Osama Bin Laden and a host of other “terrorists” on the way. By noon
on September 12, every paid glassy-eyed media commentator in America was either
spilling his guts about those “Terrible Muslim hijackers”, or liberating
hitherto classified information about Osama Bin Laden. “Oh sure, it was Bin
Laden,” they said blithely, oblivious to anything apart from their television
appearance fees.
The deliberate little white lie was essential. Ask yourself:
What would most Americans have been thinking about on September 12, if CNN had
not provided this timely fiction? Would anyone anywhere have really believed the
insane government story about failed Cessna pilots with box cutters taking over
heavy jets, then hurling them expertly around the sky like polished Top Guns
from the film of the same name? Of course not! As previously stated there would
have been no Osama Bin Laden, and no “War on Terror” in Afghanistan and occupied
Palestine.
This report is designed to examine the sequence of the Olson
events and lay them bare for public examination. Dates and times are of crucial
importance here, so if this report seems tedious try to bear with me. Before
moving on to discuss the impossibility of the alleged calls, we first need to
examine how CNN managed to “find out” about them, reported here in the September
12 CNN story at 2.06 am EDT:
“Barbara Olson, a conservative commentator and attorney, alerted
her husband, Solicitor General Ted Olson, that the plane she was on was being
hijacked Tuesday morning, Ted Olson told CNN. Shortly afterwards Flight 77
crashed into the Pentagon” … “Ted Olson told CNN that his wife said all
passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back
of the plane by armed hijackers. The only weapons she mentioned were knives and
cardboard cutters. She felt nobody was in charge and asked her husband to tell
the pilot what to do.”
At no point in the above report does CNN quote Ted Olson
directly. If the report was authentic and 100% attributable, it would have been
phrased quite differently. Instead of “Ted Olson told CNN that his wife said all
passengers and flight personnel…”, the passage would read approximately:- Mr
Olson told CNN, “My wife said all passengers and flight personnel…” Whoever
wrote this story was certainly not in direct contact with US Solicitor General
Ted Olson.
Think about it, people! If you knew or suspected your spouse’s
aircraft had just fireballed inside the Pentagon building, how would you spend
the rest of the day? Initially you would certainly be in deep shock and
unwilling to believe the reports. Then you would start to gather your wits
together, a slow process in itself. After that and depending on individual
personality, you might drive over to the Pentagon on the off chance your spouse
survived the horrific crash, or you might go home and wait for emergency
services to bring you the inevitable bad news. As a matter of record, Ted Olson
did not return to work until six days later.
About the last thing on your mind [especially if you happened to
be the US Solicitor General], would be to pick up a telephone and call the CNN
Atlanta news desk in order to give them a “scoop”. As a seasoned politician you
would already know that all matters involving national security must first be
vetted by the National Security Council. Under the extraordinary circumstances
and security overkill existing on September 11, this vetting process would have
taken a minimum of two days, and more likely three.
The timing of the CNN news release about Barbara Olson, is
therefore as impossible as the New Zealand press release back in 1963 about the
assassination of President John F. Kennedy. As reported independently by Colonel
Fletcher Prouty USAF (Retired), whoever set Kennedy up, accidentally launched a
full international newswire biography on obscure “killer” Lee Harvey Oswald,
without first taking the trouble to check his world clock.
It was still “yesterday” in New Zealand on the other side of the
International Date Line when the biography was wired from New York, enabling the
Christchurch Star newspaper was able to print a story about Oswald as the prime
suspect in its morning edition, several hours before he was first accused of the
crime by Dallas police.
If the CNN story about Ted Olson had been correct, and he really
had called them about Barbara on September 11, then he would most surely have
followed the telephone call up a few days later with a tasteful “one-on-one”
television interview, telling the hushed and respectful interviewer about how
badly he missed his wife, and about the sheer horror of it all.
There is no record of any such interview in the CNN or other
archives. Indeed, if you key “Barbara Olson” into the CNN search engine, it
returns only two related articles. The first is the creative invention on
September 12 at 2.06 am EDT [0606 GMT], and the second is on December 12, about
President Bush, who led a White House memorial that began at 8:46 a.m. EST, the
moment the first hijacked plane hit the World Trade Center three months before.
CNN includes this comment about Ted Olson:
“In a poignant remembrance at the Justice Department, U.S.
Solicitor General Theodore Olson referred to "the sufferings we have all
experienced." He made no direct reference to the death of his wife, Barbara
Olson, who was a passenger aboard the American Airlines flight that crashed into
the Pentagon…”
Regarding the same event, Fox News reports that,
extraordinarily, Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson then said Barbara
Olson's call, made "in the midst of terrible danger and turmoil swirling around
her," was a "clarion call that awakened our nation's leaders to the true nature
of the events of Sept. 11."
So Ted Olson avoided making any direct personal reference to the
death of his wife. Clearly this was not good enough for someone somewhere. By
the sixth month anniversary of the attack, Ted Olson was allegedly interviewed
by London Telegraph reporter Toby Harnden, with his exclusive story “She Asked
Me How To Stop The Plane” appearing in that London newspaper on March 5,
thereafter renamed and syndicated around dozens of western countries as “Revenge
Of The Spitfire”, finally appearing in the West Australian newspaper on Saturday
March 23, 2002.
I have diligently tried to find a copy of this story in an
American newspaper but have so far failed. The reasons for this rather perverse
“external” publication of Ted Olson’s story are not yet clear, but it seems fair
to observe that if he is ever challenged by a Senate Select Committee about the
veracity of his claims, the story could not be used against him because it was
published outside American sovereign territory.
Regardless of the real reason or reasons for its publication,
the story seems to have matured a lot since the first decoy news release by CNN
early on September 12, 2001. Here we have considerably more detail, some of
which is frankly impossible. In the alleged words of US Solicitor General
Theodore Olson:
“She [Barbara] had trouble getting through, because she wasn’t
using her cell phone – she was using the phone in the passengers’ seats,” said
Mr Olson. “I guess she didn’t have her purse, because she was calling collect,
and she was trying to get through to the Department of Justice, which is never
very easy.” … “She wanted to know ‘What can I tell the pilot? What can I do? How
can I stop this?’ ”
"What Can I tell the pilot?" Yes indeed! The forged Barbara Olson telephone call
claims that the flight deck crew were with her at the back of the aircraft,
presumably politely ushered down there by the box cutter-wielding Muslim
maniacs, who for some bizarre reason decided not to cut their throats on the
flight deck. Have you ever heard anything quite so ridiculous?
But it is at this juncture that we finally have the terminal
error. Though the American Airlines Boeing 757 is fitted with individual
telephones at each seat position, they are not of the variety where you can
simply pick up the handset and ask for an operator. On many aircraft you can
talk from one seat to another in the aircraft free of charge, but if you wish to
access the outside world you must first swipe your credit card through the
telephone. By Ted Olson’s own admission, Barbara did not have a credit card with
her.
It gets worse. On American Airlines there is a telephone "setup"
charge of US$2.50 which can only be paid by credit card, then a US$2.50
(sometimes US$5.00) charge per minute of speech thereafter. The setup charge is
the crucial element. Without paying it in advance by swiping your credit card
you cannot access the external telephone network. Under these circumstances the
passengers’ seat phone on a Boeing 757 is a much use as a plastic toy.
Perhaps Ted Olson made a mistake and Barbara managed to borrow a
credit card from a fellow passenger? Not a chance. If Barbara had done so, once
swiped through the phone, the credit card would have enabled her to call whoever
she wanted to for as long as she liked, negating any requirement to call
collect.
Sadly perhaps, the Olson telephone call claim is proved untrue.
Any American official wishing to challenge this has only to subpoena the
telephone company and Justice Department records. There will be no charge
originating from American Airlines 77 to the US Solicitor General.
Even without this hard proof, the chances of meaningfully using
a seat-telephone on Flight 77 were nil. We know from the intermittent glimpses
of the aircraft the air traffic controllers had on the radar scopes, that Flight
77 was travelling at extreme speed at very low level, pulling high “G’ turns in
the process.
Under these circumstances it would be difficult even reaching a
phone, much less using it. Finally, the phones on the Boeing 757 rely on either
ground cell phone towers or satellite bounce in order to maintain a stable
connection. At very low altitude and extreme speed, the violent changes in
aircraft attitude would render the normal telephone links completely unusable.
Exactly the same applies with United Airlines Flight 93 that
crashed before reaching any targets. The aircraft was all over the place at
extreme speed on radar, but as with Flight 77 we are asked to believe that the
“hijackers” allowed a passenger called Todd Beamer to place a thirteen minute
telephone call. Very considerate of them. The Pittsburg Channel put it this way
in a story first posted at 1.38 pm EDT on September 16, 2001:
“Todd Beamer placed a call on one of the Boeing 757's on-board
telephones and spoke for 13 minutes with GTE operator Lisa D. Jefferson,
Beamer's wife said. He provided detailed information about the hijacking and --
after the operator told him about the morning's World Trade Center and Pentagon
attacks - said he and others on the plane were planning to act against the
terrorists aboard.” Note here that Mrs Lisa Beamer did not receive a telephone
call from Todd personally, but was later “told” by an operator that her husband
had allegedly called. Just another unfortunate media con job for the trash can.
As previously stated it is the Barbara Olson story that really
counts, a view reinforced by the recent antics of the London print media. The
photo at the top of this page is a copy of that printed in the West Australian
newspaper. You only have to study it closely for a second to realize its full
subliminal potential.
Here is a studious and obviously very honest man. The US
Solicitor General sits in front of a wall lined with leather-bound volumes of
Supreme Court Arguments, with a photo of his dead wife displayed prominently in
front of him. Does anyone out there seriously believe that this man, a bastion
of US law, would tell even a minor lie on a matter as grave as national
security?
Theodore Olson’s own words indicate that he would be prepared to
do rather more than that On March 21, 2002 on its page A35, the Washington Post
newspaper printed an article titled “The Limits of Lying” by Jim Hoagland, who
writes that a statement by Solicitor General Theodore Olson in the Supreme Court
has the ring of perverse honesty.
Addressing the Supreme Court of the United States of America, US
Solicitor General Theodore Olson said it is "easy to imagine an infinite number
of situations . . . where government officials might quite legitimately have
reasons to give false information out."
|
No comments:
Post a Comment