Saturday, August 23, 2014

Top Ten 9/11 Cons: “Fraud Vitiates Everything” (FVE) by Jim Fetzer, Dennis Cimino and Mike Sparks from Veteran's Today



 
Thursday, August 21st, 2014 | Posted by

Top Ten 9/11 Cons: “Fraud Vitiates Everything” (FVE)

Share on facebookShare on twitterShare on emailShare on pinterest_shareMore Sharing Services65

Top Ten 9/11 Cons: “Fraud Vitiates Everything” (FVE)


by Jim Fetzer, Dennis Cimino and Mike Sparks

“Fraud vitiates every transaction and all contracts. Indeed, the principle is often stated, in broad and sweeping language, that fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters”–37 Am Jur 2d, Section 8
Flight 175 entering the South Tower
“FRAUD VITIATES EVERYTHING” (FVE) is the legal principle that, once it has been shown shown that one party has lied or committed a deliberate misrepresentation, their whole case is thereby compromised and no longer defensible in a court of law.
Fraud vitiates everything






37 Am Jur 2d, Section 8, states, “Fraud vitiates every transaction and all contracts. Indeed, the principle is often stated, in broad and sweeping language, that fraud destroys the validity of everything into which it enters, and that it vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments.”
Were that principle applied to the government’s case for 9/11, the demonstration of fraud and deliberate deception would warrant its dismissal in it’s entirely, since it’s entire case has been built upon nothing but fraud and deliberate deception. Here we are going to present ten examples of fraud and deliberate deception in relation to 9/11, five of which derive from the Pentagon, the other five from events in New York City. Given the principle that “Fraud vitiates everything” (FEV), each of these is sufficient, by itself, to warrant the dismissal of the official account of 9/11.
In the case of the Pentagon, they range from the relatively obvious–that the plane seen in the Pentagon frame labeled “plane” turns out to be too small to be a Boeing 757, but could be a Global Hawk delivering a missile to the building–to the far more subtle and complex case of the image that Frank Legge touts as his “conclusive proof”, which has been photoshopped–in the case of the Pentagon.
In New York City, they range from the impossible speed and impossible entry of a Boeing 767 to planting an engine component that did not come from the plane to the impossible “collapse” of the Twin Towers and the blatant controlled demolition of WTC-7. These are “ten top” cases, which warrant dismissing the government’s case in its totality because of fraud and deliberate deception, where there are many, many more.

AT THE PENTAGON


There are dozens of arguments against the official account that a B-757 hit the Pentagon, which is a fantasy. They include that the “plane” seen in the Pentagon frame is too small to be a Boeing 757; that the “hit point” could not have accommodated a 100-ton airliner with a 125′ wingspan and a tail standing 44′ above the ground; that debris from a Boeing 757 which should have been present is not there–no wings, no fuselage, no seats, no bodies, no luggage and no tail–where not even the engines, which are made of titanium and steel, were recovered; that one piece of debris, which did come from a Boeing 757, has been traced back to a crash in Cali, Columbia, in 1995; and that the smoke observed by members of Congress rushing out of the Capitol came from a series of enormous dumpsters, a blatant act of fakery.

(1) The Pentagon “plane”

According to the official account, AA Flight 77 approached the Pentagon on an acute north-east trajectory, barely skimming the ground at over 500 mph and taking out multiple lampposts, which would have ripped its wings open and caused the plane to burst into flame. The aerodynamics of flight, including “ground effect”, moreover, would have made the official trajectory–flying at high speed barely above ground level–physically impossible, because a Boeing 757 flying over 500 mph could not have come closer than 60 or more feet to the ground, which means that the official account is neither physically nor aerodynamically possible. But here is an even simpler disproof:
When the image of a Boeing 757 is sized to the tail of “the plane”, it turns out to be more than twice as long as what the frame shows, which means it cannot possibly be a Boeing 757. But, as Dennis Cimino has observed, it could have been a Global Hawk, which may have fired a missile into the building, where the white plume is not from the exhaust of any jet engine but from the solid-propellant engine of a Maverick. The fragile composition of the Global Hawk would have made it an ideal delivery system, since it would have been obliterated into tiny parts upon impact with the Pentagon.

(2) The lack of debris

Although many Americans are unaware, the hit point on the Pentagon is a hole about 10’ high and 16-17’ wide, which is surrounded by a chain-link fence, two enormous spools of cable and a pair of cars, where there are unbroken windows beside and above the opening. What we do not see is an enormous pile of aluminum debris, broken wings or the tail, bodies, seats or luggage. Remarkably, not even the engines were recovered from the crash site—although a part of a compressor, which was too small to have come from a 757 and too large for a cruise missile—was later reported there. Even more striking to me, however, is this photo of the civilian lime-green fire-trucks as they extinguish the fires:
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
Dennis #1
Since these fire trucks arrived after the crash and spent fifteen minutes or so putting it out, I have been struck by the clear, green, unblemished Pentagon lawn. There is no indication that a Boeing 757 hit the building–NONE! Nor in any of the other photographs we have featured about the Pentagon. And, as Dennis Cimino has observed, if a plane had flown into the building, then why are these supports blown outward? No plane hit the building.

(3) The planted fuselage

Later, of course, debris would start showing up. Since there was none even as the fire trucks were extinguishing the fires, it has to have come from somewhere. It would have been difficult to have had officers and enlisted men carry pieces of debris out onto the lawn without being observed, so it has occurred to me that perhaps it was dropped from a C-130, which was circling the Pentagon that morning. That’s my best guess. I am open to other possibilities, but I haven’t been able to think of real alternatives. One piece of debris has been used to cement the case for the crash of Flight 77, where Frank Legge, for example, has argued that no one has been able to show it did not come from a 757:
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
One of the oddities about this debris is that it shows no signs of having been involved in a violent crash or exposed to the intense heat of those fireballs–and it includes a piece of vine. Another student of the Pentagon, James Hanson, a newspaper reporter who earned his law degree from the University of Michigan College of Law, has traced that debris to an American Airlines 757 that crashed in a rain forest above Cali, Columbia in 1995. “It was the kind of slow-speed crash that would have torn off paneling in this fashion, with no fires, leaving them largely intact.” That this piece was on the Pentagon lawn is an obvious case of fraud and deliberate deception vitiating the official account.

(4) The dumpster fires

As though that were not disturbing enough, I was also puzzled why, later in the day, when rumors were circulating that the Capitol might be next and the members of Congress rushed out onto the steps of the building, when they looked across the Potomac, they witnesses billowing black clouds of smoke. That struck me as rather odd, since the lime green fire trucks had put out the modest fires long ago. When I took a closer look, I discovered that these black clouds of smoke were not coming from the Pentagon itself but from a series of enormous dumpsters in front of the building:
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
Image and video hosting by TinyPic
When I was still living in Duluth before my retirement in June of 2006, another student of the Pentagon came by and showed me forty-four (44) more frames of the same thing, where you could actually see light between the dumpsters and the building. If a plane has actually crashed there, it would not have been necessary to fake fires coming from the Pentagon, which appears to have been contrived to induce members of Congress to support requests for new funding Donald Rumsfeld would present the next day–another instance of fraud and deception vitiating the official account.

(5) The photoshopped images

When we turn to the photograph that Frank Legge  cites as “proof positive” of the presence of an airliner, a B-757, specifically, inside the Pentagon, not only do you not notice no debris associated with an airliner, but it turns out that  the photo has been altered extensively–it has been photoshopped!–to obfuscate details in it (see the next photo with the cyan marking and the magenta bottom line)  In this photograph, the cyan area (expanded in the final photo) clearly reveals that photoshopping was crudely used to add the extremely lighter area into the image:
Even closer examination in the debris field mostly in the upper half shows demarcation lines of cut and paste having been performed in more than one area inside it.  In his original upper ceiling beam (left-hand side), you can see where they pasted in over the beam to obfuscate something that happened on the beam itself in an attempt to hide that from us.  The shading of the reverse “E” area shows, beyond any doubt, that this photo was heavily retouched and altered.
However they were not able to paste any airliner parts into it without having issues with perspective and sizing very obvious to the naked eye. This photo, which Legge himself emphasizes, is bogus and hence “non-authentic”. He thus picked a very sad and poor choice from Jim Hoffman’s web site.  A very good question to ask Frank Legge, therefore, is, “Why did you pick a photography that had been altered and is also bereft of any sign of aircraft wreckage?”
That this photo was shopped may or may not have been something of which the Journal of 9/11 Studies was aware when it accepted his article for publication. But that means its vaunted “peer-review” process, upon which Steven Jones has placed so much emphasis, failed in this instance. As I have explained elsewhere, Jones also advocates an inadequate mode of scientific reasoning, which means that the procedures he endorses as “scientific” are not those that properly qualify. But something is terribly wrong when a faked photo appears in the Journal of 9/11 Studies.

IN NEW YORK


(6) The Impossible speed


Indeed, as John Lear, perhaps our nation’s most distinguished pilot, has observed, the plane in these videos does not even have strobe lights, which are required of every commercial carrier. But how can a Boeing 767 possibly travel at an impossible speed (as Pilots for 9/11 Truth has confirmed), where the estimates of its speed run as high as 560 mph or more, which is aerodynamically impossible at the altitude of 700-1,000′ at which this flight trajectory was taking place?

(7) The Impossible entry

The footage of the South Tower hit exemplifies several anomalies, including a Boeing 767 flying at an impossible speed, an impossible entry into the building (in violation of Newton’s laws), and even passing through its own length into the building in the same number of frames it passes through its own length in air—which is impossible, unless this 500,000 ton, steel and concrete building posed no more resistance to its trajectory in flight than air.
Some have claimed that this was a “special plane” that could fly faster than a standard Boeing 767, but no real plane could violate Newton’s laws. The structure of the building, moreover, meant that it actually intersected with eight different floors. Each of those floors consisted of steel trusses connected at one end to the core columns and at the other to the steel support columns.
They were filled with 4-8” of concrete (deeper in the v-shaped grooves) and posed enormous horizontal resistance. (Imagine what would happen to a plane encountering one of them suspended in space!) The windows were 18” wide and the support columns one meter apart, while there were no windows between floors, which means far less than 50% if the plane should have entered via them. But as Jack White has shown here, that is not what the videos display:
No real plane–commercial, military or otherwise–could enter a steel and concrete building in violation of Newton’s laws, pass through its own length into the building in the same number of frames that it passes through its own length in air, and not have its fuel explode as it makes contact with that massive edifice? Even the frames from the Pentagon show a huge fireball upon impact. If that was true of the 757 there, why is it not also true of the 767 here? And no real plane could have passed through and its nose come out the other side. It looks as though the fabrication of Flight 77 fakery was just a bit better than the fabrication of Flight 175 fakery. But both involved massive fraud and deception.

(8) The planted engine

Notice that the plane completely enters the building before its jet fuel explodes, when one would have thought that, insofar as most of its fuel is stored in its wings, they should have exploded on entry—which is comparable to the failure of the 757 at the Pentagon to have its fuel explode when its wings hit those lampposts. And while some have sought to support the claim that this was a real 767 based upon the engine found at Church & Murray Streets, those who were fabricating evidence in this case did not get it right:  what we have is a JTD9 engine with a cooling duct assembly from a Boeing aircraft manufactured in the 1970s, not the plane allegedly used for Flight 175:

Since this is the wrong engine component and was off-loaded as a prop, how can anyone be so gullible as to believe that it supports the official account, especially when its under a steel scaffolding and sitting on a sidewalk, where if something that massive had hit there at high velocity (having come from the South Tower as alleged), it would have been buried half-way into the concrete, not sitting on top of it? There is even a dolly present, which–although not heavy-duty–may have played a role in moving it from the white van to its location on the sidewalk. This a blatant case of deliberate deception and fakery that completely vitiates the official account.

(9) The impossible collapse

The Twin Towers were masterpieces of architecture and engineering, which received multiple awards at the time. By using an innovative design known as “a tube within a tube”–which was innovative with regard to the elevator systems (using a combination of express and local elevators) and by adopting 47 massive core columns at the center connected to 238 external steel support columns by steel trusses–the architect, Minoru Yamaski, created enormous open space unobstructed by walls and support columns. Here you can see the 47 core columns at the center, where the external steel support columns–which would be added to what is shown–created the equivalent of “a steel beam 209′ deep”:
As Chuck Boldwyn has shown, the thickness of the steel varied from six inches thick in the subbasements to a quarter-inch thick at the top, which meant that the overwhelming mass of the steel was below the level at which “the plane” is alleged to have hit the North Tower. By his calculation, the fourteen floors above the “hit point” represented 1.4% of the mass of the steel, where it is preposterous to suppose that its collapse could have overcome the 98.6% of the mass of the steel below it. Indeed, as John Skilling observed, the towers were build with a safety factor of 20, which means that each floor could support 20 times its expected live load (dead load + furniture, facilities and human personnel):
The claim that the jet fuel from the plane strikes burned so intensely it caused the steel to weaken cannot withstand critical scrutiny. The steel used in the building was certified by Underwriters Laboratories, Inc., to 2,000*F for three to four hours without suffering any adverse effects. NIST studied 236 samples of steel and found that 233 had not been exposed to temperatures above 500*F and the other three not above 1,200*F. Plus the fires in the South Tower lasted less than an hour, in the North less than an hour-and-a-half. The fires burned neither long enough nor hot enough to affect the steel. It was physically impossible for them to collapse.
As Jesse Ventura has observed, propane burns hotter than kerosene (the constituent of “jet fuel”), yet his camping stove, which is made of steel, does not melt when he uses it on a camping trip.  Far from collapsing, both buildings are being blown apart in every direction by enormous sources of energy, where they are being converted into millions of cubic yards of very fine dust and, when destruction is complete, there is no massive pile of debris in their footprint, which is a classic sign of a building’s collapse. Unlike WTC-7, the Twin Towers did not collapse, which means that the official account characterizing them as having “collapsed” is another blatant fabrication and deliberate deception.

(10) The controlled demolition

Unlike the Twin Towers, WTC-7 came down in a classic “controlled demolition” at 5:20 PM that day, about seven hours after the destruction of WTC-1 and WTC-2, which I prefer to refer to as “demolitions under control”, since they were clearly not classic controlled demolitions. You can see the penthouse kink, where all the floors fall at the same time and, after about 6.5 seconds, there is a stack of debris (mostly floors) equal to about 12% of the height of the original. By contrast, the floors of the Twin Towers remain stationary, waiting their turn to be “blown to kingdom come” (in the memorable phrase of Morgan Reynolds). Compare the below video with those for the towers above:
Almost everyone knows that Larry Silverstein acknowledge authorizing the building to be “pulled”, which is a term for taking it down by controlled demolition. Far fewer are aware that Barry Jennings (from the New York City Emergency Management Division) was in WTC-7 that morning, where he went to the Command and Control Center, which had its own air and water supply, and found half-eaten sandwiches and still-steaming cups of coffee. A fireman found him and escorted him out of the building, while explosions were going off and a stairway was blown out from under him. At one point, he felt himself stepping over dead bodies, which he could feel but because of the darkness, he could not see:
Richard Gage and A&E911 focus on WTC-7, where Barry Jennings was inside the building that day. His story is very compelling and makes the case that this was not a consequence of the destruction of the Twin Towers but an entirely separate event involving the use of explosives. It would have made for compelling television on C-SPAN when Gage made his recent appearance, but the best he could do was talking about nanothermite for the umpteenth time. I am sorry, but Barry Jenning’s story would have made an impact on the public, especially by observing that he died a few days before NIST would release its report on WTC-7, which he was in the position to contradict on the basis of his own personal experience. Consider the options that we have enumerated here and ask, “Why didn’t he talk about them?”
Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.
Dennis Cimino has extensive engineering and support experience with military electronics, predominantly US Navy Combat Systems, was the Navy’s top EMI troubleshooter before he went to work for Raytheon in the 1980s.
Mike Sparks, a 1st Lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve, has published articles in Air Defense, Armor, Artillery Online, Armed Forces Journal International, and Behind the Lines. He is the author of James Bond is Real (forthcoming).
Bookmark and Share
Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=317141
The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT or any other VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners and technicians. Legal Notice

Education
Posted by on Aug 21 2014, With 4318 Reads, Filed under Of Interest, WarZone. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

COMMENTS

To post, we ask that you login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.
Don't have a social network account? Register and Login direct with VT and post.
Before you post, read our Comment Policy - Feedback

63 Comments for “Top Ten 9/11 Cons: “Fraud Vitiates Everything” (FVE)”

  1. dalethorn
    August 22, 2014 - 8:57 pm
    Every Septemer from 1995 through 2007 I would fly from L.A. to Akron Ohio to visit relatives, and I was there the morning of 9/11 when my wife and her mother caught the news story on TV. Sometime after that, perhaps a year or two later, the Akron Beacon Journal ran a big feature on the Patriot Act, telling its readers explicitly with no mincing of words that “You no longer have the right ….” (listing several of the Bill of Rights)… and there it was for everyone to see, spelled out in detail in Knight-Ridder’s flagship newspaper. Presumably most Americans read in their newspapers at that same time that their Bill of Rights was being legislated away by their cowardly and treasonous representatives, and yet they did nothing. This week several
    read more ...
  2. Howard T.Lewis III
    August 22, 2014 - 8:48 pm
    At Activist Post’s ‘Architects and Engineers Question Official 9/11 Story’ comments column for September 11, 2010, a commenter provided an explanation of how the WTC impacting jets may themselves had been prepped with a thermitic (high heat creating on activation) paint, as evidence had demonstrated Senator Paul Wellstone’s group crash plane had been. I now acknowledge that this fellow may have been correct. This attack was how they gave us the legal and civil means to arrest and lock up top military officers with Cheney/Rumsfeld phone numbers in their address books and/or belong to ‘The Fat Cats’.
  3. stephanaugust
    August 22, 2014 - 2:09 pm
    As one comment mentioned the famous Naudet brothers.
    When I saw their “documentation,” I thought they would make a lot of movies, but since 9/11 they directed only two small movies, In God’s Name, and The Presidents’ Gatekeepers.
    How do these guys make their living? They do not even have a homepage.
    • Jim Fetzer
      August 22, 2014 - 2:44 pm
      And, as I was not the first to notice, their name, “Naudet”, is a rearrangement of “Duane St.” (minus the “s”), which is the location from which they shot their astounding footage of “Flight 11″ hitting the North Tower. They are so arrogant that they shove it in our faces and laugh when we are taken in. They count on the American people to play their role as gullible saps–and most of the time, they are right!
  4. jvmcdee
    August 22, 2014 - 8:23 am
    I still accept a premise which does not agree with this account of Dr. Fetzer’s although we both dismiss the Official Account as bad fiction.
    I still believe or suspect 1) one Boeing aircraft (767?) struck each WTC 1&2, 2) these two Boeing aircraft were modified, non-passenger, windowless aircraft without airline logo or livery, 3) these two Boeings were from Dov Zokheims’ (sp?) USAF tanker fleet, 3) both aircraft emitted a flash immediately before impact (see Naudet Bros. video et al.), 4) these aircraft were swapped mid air somewhat consistent with the 1962 Operation Northwoods scenario, 5) The latter of the two, South Tower strike, had an obvious extruding pod on right(starboard) belly of fuselage between wings, 6) the midair
    read more ...
    • Jim Fetzer
      August 22, 2014 - 9:03 am
      Very nice post, John, which I appreciate. I believe the plan was to use remotely-controlled drones (which one of the companies owned by Dov Zakheim, the Pentagon Comptroller, produced) until it became apparent that it would be physically impossible to get them completely into the towers before they exploded, which was the objective to create a pseudo-explanation for the “collapse” of the building, but where the fires that remained after the spectacular fireballs consumed such jet fuel as was (on my account) pre-positioned there burned neither hot enough nor long enough to weaken the steel, much less melt it. No real planes could have entered those buildings with no loss in velocity, which we have established on the basis of frame-by-frame analysis.
      read more ...
  5. Simpleton
    August 22, 2014 - 2:10 am
    Forget zionistans $2.3 trillion gain of free “transfers” from the US Army Rumsy hole in the Pentagon books, or silversteins $7.2 billion insurance payout, the biggest beneficiary was US Solicitor General Ted Olson. In return for giving credence to the hoax by bearing false witness with his reference to impossible cell fone calls from his wife Barbara on Flight 77, he was allowed to murder her, get without paying alimony, and get himself a brand new model instead !
    • Jim Fetzer
      August 22, 2014 - 6:09 am
      There is some speculation that Barbara went to Europe and had cosmetic surgery, then returned as “Lady Booth” and remarried her husband! Check it out and see what you can come up with, but even the FBI confirmed that no call between them had actually taken place on 9/11.
      • LC
        August 22, 2014 - 6:59 am
        YES;; & here is the surgery;
        barb olson lady booth
        ******www.youtube.com/watch?v=kX9-viIg9Gw
        • Howard T.Lewis III
          August 22, 2014 - 7:17 pm
          Frank Sturgis, JFK hitman and Operation40 Bush cabal man, is a good study in plastic surgery, as is Joan Rivers and Burt Reynolds. Olsen the liar aided and abetted the murder of his own wife, unless she lives and is not the new wife. Too radically different head and jaw shape, and an unecessary ruse.
    • LC
      August 22, 2014 - 6:59 am
      The TRILLIONS disappeared into PentaCon blackholes like these which are a few of teh ones that come up if you type in Google IMAGES any variety of “PENTAGON BLACKHOLES”;;;
      ******//i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/120613025542-nasa-nustar-story-top.jpg
      *******www.bibliotecapleyades.net/imagenes_sociopol/911_90_11.jpg
      the second above example shows an actual tunnel was blown out all the way the PentaCon’s courtyard. This confirms report of the Navy Journalist lady that explosives charges were deployed on each wall to make this tunnel which sucked out not just the trillions before the 2.3 but also many more trillions afterward!!!
      Who says black-holes aint useful???
  6. Simpleton
    August 22, 2014 - 2:01 am
    The biggest mystery is HOW they managed to con billions of people at that time when it all appears so amateurish and stupid now? BTW – WHERE is Aaron Brown the synagogue of satan frontman who was commentating live on CNN but placed conveniently far away by the “big jew” at the top of the food chain. I swear I saw a white clouds subliminal image of an OBL complete with turban & beard inserted in the bellowing clouds from the pulverized dust resulting from the mini nuking. Its gotta be a satanic freemason/kabbalah sacrificel that led to this mass deception.
    • Jim Fetzer
      August 22, 2014 - 6:12 am
      I have the impression that his image was subtly conveyed in the smoke emanating from one of the towers, which would mean the footage had–at least, to that extent–been manipulated or manufactured. But there is no doubt that the mass media has gone with the official story to this day.
  7. LC
    August 21, 2014 - 9:07 pm
    Folks; the passport was REAL. Here it is;;;
    9/11 “Terrorist” Fire Proof Passport Exposed – Black Boxes Destroyed But Paper Passport Survives
    ********www.youtube.com/watch?v=0qM9RGTQy8U
    BTW;;; Ace Baker offered $100,000 to examine the ORIGINAL of any one of the plane collision videos because he (& almost every VT reader) has no doubt they are all bogus.
    Not one of the films turned up for examination!!!
    & checkout this video that shows up on right;
    “CNN Coverage of Freemason Congressman Nick Rahall Mocking the Public”
    Rahall was nominated to Freemasonry by Robert Byrd who was at the Bohemian Grove murder-cannibalism ritual of victim Kevin Collins together with a bunch of other cannibals including Ratzinger+Barney
    read more ...
  8. SHORT2POINT
    August 21, 2014 - 6:56 pm
    Jim Dean & Duff the EMAIL Account I used to Use to Access This Site And This Account Has Been Taken over Since A Month And A Half . So I dont receive ANY YAHOO Emails While MY ACCOUNT gets ILLEGALLY Scrutinised ….. BTW had that Account Since 1997 AD & 2014 Theyre Making MOVES ON ” ME ” … Screw ‘Em ….. BTW I DO NOT AT ALL CARE ABOUT SHIT AFTER HAVING THEM DESTROY MY HARDWORKING SANE ” LIFE ” ……
  9. wjabbe
    August 21, 2014 - 6:55 pm
    “Crime is contageous. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for the law.” Justice Louis Brandeis, U.S. Supreme Court Justice. If any 4 star general either had knowledge of criminal activity or participated in it, or both, they had a fundamental sworn duty to speak up and expose it pronto. Since none did, but they dismally failed in their sworn duty to defend America from attack that fateful day, they then become criminals and lawbreakers themselves. The basic problem is that so called “representative government” has made it virtually impossible for ordinary citizens to take legal action against such criminals when corrupt outlaw lawyers in the so called “justice department” fail or refuse to do so. The corrupt lawyers who corruptly
    read more ...
    • wjabbe
      August 21, 2014 - 7:14 pm
      In some societies, when a military or other political leader fails so miserably, as our four star generals did on 9/11/01, in their dismal failure to defend America from attack that day, despite virtually unlimited intelligence and physical and financial resources to do so, they would at minimum resign in disgrace or at most commit suicide. So far as I know, none of the roughly 39 four star generals did either of these acts, but arrogantly continued to live in the protection and at the expense of the very society they collectively defrauded and committed treason against. Obviously our elected non representatives have totally failed by creating one sided laws for lowly citizens to abide by, while another set of laws encouraging unadjudicated criminal misconduct
      read more ...
      • wjabbe
        August 21, 2014 - 7:29 pm
        As a United States Citizen in good standing for some 75+ years, born at Cleveland, Ohio in 1939, raised at Sierra Madre, California from about 1943-1966, lived at Athens, Georgia 1966-present, graduated from Pasadena High School 1956, University of California, Berkeley, A.B., physics, 1961, California State University at Los Angeles, M.S. physics, 1962, Ph.D., Physics, UC Riverside, 1966, Institute of Science and Technology Fellow, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1966-1967, former faculty member University of Georgia with lifetime tenure, 1966-1978, voluntarily resigned, I hereby demand that all 4 star generals of the U.S. on 9/11/01 immediately contact Mr. Gordon Duff, Senior Editor Veterans Today and honestly and openly and truthfully reveal to him every detail
        read more ...
  10. William St. George
    August 21, 2014 - 6:29 pm
    This was made possible by an “other directed” society. Once the Jones bought the offical account everyone else felt compelled to. You only need to fool a few of the right people and the “truth” will cascade.
  11. Preston James, Ph.D
    August 21, 2014 - 6:10 pm
    Bingo, the Fetzer research team shreds the 9/11/01 Attack on America once again. They prove the case for unmistakable fraud which invalidates every single thing they have argued. Another strategically important article in bringing this whole USG/Israeli/AIPAC scam down upon the perps and for busting the Controlled Major Mass Media (CMMM).
    This fine work is just another example of the new open system research methodology developed by Professor Fetzer. The quality of the experts he has brought in on these false-flag attacks are impressive to say the least and their research is impeccable. So far Prof. Fetzer has assembled numerous teams of formidable researchers, top experts in their areas of expertise. This is a perfect of example what can be attained with the use
    read more ...
  12. jake gittes
    August 21, 2014 - 5:36 pm
    That Photoshopped photo doesn’t make sense. Did the artist M.C. Escher create it?
    http //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/Escher%27s_Relativity.jpg
    1st of all, where’s the plane?
    2nd, is the area outlined in green where the “plane” (or as Rumsfeld more accurately termed “the missile”) hit the building?
    If so, the white-ish area would seem to be sunlight coming in the hole, but the angles don’t make sense. Near the “E” there’s a right-angled white area which is surrounded by a wood-brown area, which doesn’t make sense if the white area is what’s illuminated by the sun. That area just doesn’t make sense. It looks manipulated.
    But most importantly, where’s the freakin’ plane?? Hell, the special effects in the movie “Airplane!” of the
    read more ...
    • Howard T.Lewis III
      August 22, 2014 - 7:09 pm
      Just because one or two photos do not include parts, does not mean A-3 and Global Hawk parts are not present inside the pentagon 9-11-2001. This is a photoshop for ‘no planes’ you fool. How, indeed, could this photo have been taken in the impact area when the floors collapsed 45 minutes after the impact? More holograms? Forget Fetzer for a minute and use your own mentality. I now think Dr. Fetzer wants my premature death to be subjected to artistic embellishments by his lumpy old self and that CIA pilot turned hologram-some-day priest, John Lear. I remain the only WTC construction/nuke demolition live eye/ear witness to grace the pages of Veterans Today and I get feedback from virtually no one here. Too bad for Fetzer my commentary had over 250 million search results before
      read more ...
  13. jvmcdee
    August 21, 2014 - 4:42 pm
    The ten falsities or omissions which seem to me to best refute the Official Account are
    1. WTC 7 symmetrical nearly free fall collapse and then underreported by MSM;
    2. Pentagon lack of debris;
    3. Pentagon fifteen foot circular hole;
    4. WTC 1 & 2 collapses of structures built to withstand impact by wide body;
    5. WTC 6 crater never reported by MSM;
    6. NORAD lost at sea or lost in space or otherwise AWOL;
    7. Lack of building mass at Ground Zero (see Jennings Stephanopoulus video);
    8. Suicidal amateur pilots flying precision aerobatics at high velocity in 767′s;
    9. Hijacker passport found by FBI two blocks away;
    10. Faked cell phone calls from altitude later disowned by FBI.
    • Jim Fetzer
      August 21, 2014 - 6:32 pm
      We agree that there are many other examples of fraud in this case, since the entire “official account” is a myth. No hijackers were aboard any of the planes. None of the planes crashed. No passengers died in crashes that did not take place. The phone calls from the planes were faked. The Twin Towers did not collapse. WTC-7 was an almost perfect example of a classic controlled demolition. And there are many more.
  14. Howard T.Lewis III
    August 21, 2014 - 2:32 pm
    Ooooooooooooooofffffff……………………………………. The Chertoff pre-Janet United States Coast Guard Report on What Hit the Pentagon on 9-11-2001 and the heat creating primer paint applied in an electrical field on the structural steel and 1/2″ steel perimeter panel assemblies throughout the WTCs I and II remain accepted as evidence. Certainly and proven, exploding bolts and high speed chemical steel melter and steel vaporizer were available and the high speed liquid and paste steel cutter/melter sold world wide from on site. The nukes all went off later. The jet engine on the street was a type installed in Boeing 737-300s. A video taken from below one jet establishes that one impacting jet matches proportionally a Boeing 737-300(military version), which also matches the hole left by something
    read more ...
    • Howard T.Lewis III
      August 21, 2014 - 3:07 pm
      Part of being an experienced fighter is having a developed repertoire of feints, weaves, fakes, and illusions with which to confound and frustrate one’s opponent. Also it helps to expect such behavior from a misbehaving troll or opponent. I have found with 9-11 research, as elsewhere, that the appearance of a bob, weave, or fake is just that, not an actual strike, but a diversion. More will follow until one fighter is down. 1/2″ thick structural steel plate is formidable stuff unless cut, liquified, or sublimated. Isaac Newton attempted alchemy but failed. He also knew about the liquification of steel.
      Let’s examine the impact zones and who occupied the impact zones at the WTCs and The United States Coast Guard Report on What Hit the Pentagon on 9-11-2001. If each reader independently
      read more ...
    • Jim Fetzer
      August 21, 2014 - 3:35 pm
      Your “loose nuts and bolts” would not permit a Boeing 767 (757, 747, 737–you take your pick!) to enter either of these buildings because they were approaching on angles, where the North Tower “plane” was intersecting seven (7) floors consisting of steel trusses connected, at one end, to the core columns and, at the other, to the external steel support columns–and the South Tower eight (8). Each of them was in effect a steel beam 208′ feet deep, covered by an acre of concrete. There would have been no need to plant a fake engine or lower a landing gear between buildings. Real planes would have crumpled, their wings and tail broken off, with bodies, seats and luggage falling to the ground. You have gone off the deep end about this, for reasons I cannot begin to fathom. But that you have fallen
      read more ...
      • Howard T.Lewis III
        August 22, 2014 - 6:29 pm
        You, James Fetzer operate from a frame of reference distant from fields of applied metallurgy and being present for discussions of the development of the WTCs/nuke demolition system and can fall back on name calling and posturing. jvmcdee is worth listening to. The white flashes seem to show the demolition presets being initiated. Look at the soot stain belts around the impact levels. NOT FROM BURNT CARPETS. Your casual dismissals of my input on this topic of the attacks on the WTC have earned you a solid bitch-slap from my dear deceased mother before your own day of judgement. 9-11 witnesses are being murdered Sir Pompous.
        I can not afford to produce the simple demonstrations to prove my chemical high speed chemical steel points beyond reasonable examination of unaltered videos and
        read more ...
        • Jim Fetzer
          August 22, 2014 - 7:01 pm
          This simply baffles me, Howard. I just don’t understand it. I will ask Dennis if he sees any conceivable merit in your position.
          • Howard T.Lewis III
            August 22, 2014 - 9:52 pm
            Cimono is good. Talk to a Sandia old timer about the ARCO WTC prototypes. Invest $10.00 in some scrap steel and get ahold of some ordnance and do a video. Have GDuff swap some nuclear triggers for some high speed chemical-steel-cutter-in-a-tube. I have been shot at (sounds like a bumblebee going by your ear), dosed, and more on the daytime streets of Hawai’i and Seattle since my father bailed out of the WTC project. Unlike BOboma I do not need to come up with a multi million dollar bribe to establish my credentials, or a college degree. These radically disharmonious street occurences, all witnessed and recorded, could be for my association with the WTC project. I am not free to shoot back at ‘plausible deniability”.
            Is the USCG report a fake? I think not. The WTC impacts appear as mutually
            read more ...
  15. bobeejoe
    August 21, 2014 - 1:14 pm
    In order to fly the planes they would have to disengage the gps on the CPU. Then they would have to fly manually using landmarks for 30000 feet?!?! This strains credulity.
  16. Sir_Guy
    August 21, 2014 - 11:42 am
    Not sure if it’s a real problem with the official account… Did the alleged pilots of the aircraft involved in the 9/11 attacks actually have access to realistically adequate training to prepare them to pilot advanced commercial aircraft? I understand, correctly or not, that the maneuvers involved in the attacks on the WTC were complicated and difficult. I’ve read that at least one of the pilots already had a commercial pilots license. But some of the others only trained to fly small aircraft. Based on the official timeline, unless those guys went through some kind of accelerated training, they wouldn’t have had time to complete the training and certification required to get time on a simulator in a normal pilots program. I’m no expert on this. Just seems like it might be another inconsistency.

    read more ...
    • Jim Fetzer
      August 21, 2014 - 11:47 am
      Yes, it is a problem for the official account, which Pilots for 9/11 Truth has frequently emphasized they did not have the background, training or experience to handle 757s or 767s. That is another obvious glitch in the scenario that was being stitched together to fake out the American people. Indeed, the whole scheme appears to have been outlined by the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, Philip Zelikow, who had completed a draft of THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT a year before he shared it with any members of the staff.
  17. drbhelthi
    August 21, 2014 - 11:32 am
    My copy of several frames of the original video of the Pentagon shows one, 9´ hole made by the Tomahawk. There are no collapsed floors. There is no debri from an airliner plastered onto the outside wall of the Pentagon nor scattered all over the grounds, such as a twin-engine jet-liner would have made.
    • Charlotte NC Bill
      August 21, 2014 - 4:00 pm
      It may have been the Granit missile that Victor Bout unwittingly sold these people ( he didn’t know they were going to kill a bunch of accountants with it..)
      • disobey4sure
        August 21, 2014 - 11:27 pm
        Charlotte NC Bill— If you really want to know all about the Granit missile, you should read the whole story from Dimitri Khalezov’s 2013 book– Download it here http //www.911-truth.net/9-11thology-third_truth_v4_full.zip
        You will also read about Victor Bout(who was from the same hometown as Dimitri Khalezov, and were friends). Victor did Not sell the missiles! Jim Fetzer is still in denial– maybe because he doesn’t have time to read the book? Why speculate when Dimitri will answer all (or most) of your questions?
        • Jim Fetzer
          August 22, 2014 - 6:19 am
          Well, we agree that the towers were nuked (using mini nukes rather than 150kt nukes), that a missile hit the Pentagon (a Maverick rather than a Tomahawk), where I interviewed Dimitri on “The Real Deal” (radiofetzer.blogspot.com). Dennis has explained how his theory could work together with our theory in “9/11 A world swirling in a volcano of lies”, http //www.veteranstoday.com/2014/02/14/911-a-world-swirling-in-a-volcano-of-lies/ I think you may have missed it.
        • Jim Fetzer
          August 22, 2014 - 6:27 am
          Why am I the one “in denial” and why does it have to have been a Granit? Dennis believes it was a Maverick, which we have written about in “Reflections on the Pentagon A 9/11 photographic review”. I have explained many times why I do not believe Khalezov has it right because if large nukes were beneath all three buildings, then they would have been destroyed the same way (when they obviously were not); the towers would have been demolished from the bottom up (when they were blown-apart from the top down); and the appearance of the stability of their lower floors would have been an illusion (which does not seem to be the case). But Dennis has attempted to reconcile Dimitri’s theory with that of Don Fox, Dr. Ed Ward and others in “9/11 A world swirling in a volcano of lies” right her at VT. I recommend that
          read more ...
          • disobey4sure
            August 23, 2014 - 12:43 am
            Jim– Why do I say you are in denial??
            At least Dimitri has sound reasoning, a close connection to why he believes it was a Granit missile(his close Russian friend was killed in Bangkok for supplying Dimitri with the evidence),
            and in the book you would see how it was accomplished and why the Military was patrolling
            offshore instead of rushing to the White House and Pentagon. It was almost 4 years ago that
            Dimitri was “interviewed” for YouTube and yours. Without reading his complete book, you do a disservice to the road to a full truth. You are still beating a dead horse with your set idea that
            the WTCs were destroyed from top-down. Dimitri is not speaking of “Theory” when he explains in detail how an Underground Nuclear Explosion works, it’s effects, and the overall results.
            Is Dimitri
            read more ...
  18. Simpleton
    August 21, 2014 - 10:52 am
    Right underneath our noses as we speak the SAME devils are delayiong the MH17 black box info, they cant doctor it either for fear the RUSSIANS HAVE ALREADY COPIED THE BLACK BOX RECORDERS. IT WOULD BE DIGGING A DEEPER HOLE AFTER THE FAKED AUDIO, FAKE BUK MOVEMENT VIDEO, ETC.
  19. peter
    August 21, 2014 - 10:46 am
    Great article Jim. You hit one out of the park when others aren’t even playing the same sport! You know according to Gordon if you get some kerosene, put it on your arm, and light it, you could hurt yourself in a few minutes if you don’t get a towel and put it out. I think he even said you could even make a charcoal fire with it, in about ten minutes.
  20. wjabbe
    August 21, 2014 - 10:32 am
    I think this is a very convincing article by Jim Fetzer, Dennis Cimino and Mike Sparks. About a year ago I communicated with a top expert in this field who published one of the first articles on this subject in a major engineering journal. While he had revised his original claims somewhat, when I asked him generally what he thought about all this, he had nothing further to add and did not appear to be interested in any other possibilities. Sadly I think many others, even intelligent, highly educated folks, blindly accept the official party line on this subject. I just talked to a friend who does not appear to be convinced. Brainwashing and propaganda are very powerful and difficult if not impossible to overcome with reason. At bottom all this is a failure of education, especially so called higher education.
    read more ...
    • wjabbe
      August 21, 2014 - 10:42 am
      With all this silence and appearent fear of expressing an opinion, lest one may lose some government favor or grant money or become persona non grata, etc., etc., etc., where political correctness has run amok, how can we make any progress solving our many problems as a nation? Somehow citizens must find some practical way to require government officials to come under the same rules of conduct expected of ordinary citizens, and practical ways to enforce the rules of conduct. Oaths are meaningless. Citizens, for example, must be allowed and encouraged to form and conduct grand jury proceedings and court proceedings or something of this nature. Secrecy must be ended with stiff penalties for failing to reveal government information. Government officials must be held personally responsible for actions; all immunity
      read more ...
    • drbhelthi
      August 21, 2014 - 11:49 am
      3 and 4-star generals are similar to any clique. How many active ones on August 25, 2001, did not know about the NORAD set-up? Disregarding altruistic patriotism, had any of them leaked the truth, how long would that person have remained alive? How many of them have shown patriotic honesty in the meantime and revealed ANY accurate information about what they all knew ?
      What did former President Eisenhower warn about the industrial-military complex ?
  21. Allesandro
    August 21, 2014 - 8:59 am
    If you want to really get INSPIRED that the good guys are going to WIN the 9/11crime case(s) view these 3 very credible people regarding 9/11 crimes of 3 different types, Guaranteed to make your day.
    https //www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=e-Of50l77YQ
    https //www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oMdLVw3AsV4
    …and this 3rd by Alan Sabrosky, Jewish. It’s important that he in blowing the whistle on Israeli involvement, so that not all Jewish people get blamed-condemned for 9/11
    https //www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=H0v7_O53J0k
    The idea that Israel Set-up and Framed Muslims for the crimes they planned and committed, made as much money doing it as possible and caused MILLIONS to die horrible deaths is also extremely important, disturbing,
    read more ...
  22. Calvin
    August 21, 2014 - 8:51 am
    Super article. Dead on target. Thank you Professor et al.
  23. LC
    August 21, 2014 - 7:11 am
    B R A V O Gentlemen;;;
    So you don’t believe the official story WRAPPED in this clip??? Bush cabal is so P….ssssed!!!
    I’m Osama – Rucka Rucka Ali
    ******www.youtube.com/watch?v=8hWVSvzh9os
    Or can you believe my version summarized in your recent page comment below;;;
    *******www.veteranstoday.com/2014/08/14/limited-hangouts-kevin-ryan-ae911-and-the-journal-of-911-studies/comment-page-1/#comment-554897
    BTW;;; The plane wing going behind a building half mile away is quite normal in Road Runner cartoons when he crosses a canyon with one leap.
    Ace Baker calls those 9/11 specials “CARTOON PHYSICS”.
  24. balzardragon
    August 21, 2014 - 6:33 am
    we are to believe with information from our media
    Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK
    Sirhan Bishara Sirhan killed RFK
    James Earl Ray killed MLK
    Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab actually had bombs in his underware
    19 guys in a cave did 911 and two planes collapsed 3 skyscrapers in free fall speed
    Keep up the good work Dr. Fetzer
    THANK YOU
  25. Allesandro
    August 21, 2014 - 5:32 am
    Great Work, INVALUABLE, Thanks, this is one more ***** STARS for the Good Guys vs the Criminal Co-Conspirators.
    This is one huge benefit of the Internet having so many minds looking at the facts with so many varied talents, specialties, abilities, linked together in real time. The ‘NET is not the new Gutenberg Press, it’s SO MUCH MORE. It’s LINKED Focused Consciousness aimed at the problem like a LASER. They, the criminals, even with all their assets can NOT Compete, No Way.
    I for example have been interested in the “Ground Effect” phenomena for 30 years and know that the Boeing could NOT fly at those heights, it would crash before hitting the building, but many people are probably not as interested in that as I am, fine, but they know other valuable things, aspects, that I don’t, but we can all collaborate. Great,
    read more ...
    • Allesandro
      August 21, 2014 - 5:56 am
      It will feel great when we “Claw Back” the fraudulent, ill-gotten gains from the Silverstein Empire with Treble Damages, court costs, and RICO pulling in all his friends who benefited from the murder of all those innocent people, there will nothing left, no matter where in Israel or Caymans, or anywhere else, it’s hidden. With the World Wide Web, the Internet there will be NO WHERE TO HIDE, no where they can escape to. I’m feeling better already, what a great article.
      The rest of the world will get a big psychological boost too, knowing they helped, they’re not getting away with it, and justice prevails, and they helped us when in need, an example for others to follow, like the family that had their loved one murdered after 9/11 “9/11 Dutch Demolition Expert Danny Jowenko Dies In “Car Crash”
  27. Martin Maloney
    August 21, 2014 - 4:39 am
    I’ve posted this info, several times in the past, and no one has ever responded. Perhaps people consider it trivial.
    Note that the two frames of the approach of “the plane” lack a time/date stamp. They are from the re-release, in perhaps May, 2007. (It was when Jamie McIntyre did his about-face about the debris on the Pentagon lawn.)
    When the frames were first released, right after 9/11. there was a time/date stamp – and the time was in the afternoon.
    So why were the frames altered for the re-release? And does it matter?
    • Jim Fetzer
      August 21, 2014 - 8:52 am
      Martin, You are right they had the wrong date/time stamps. You are completely correct. Let me see if I have copies of those five frames when they were released. I think there is only one approach frame, but if there were two, that would be most interesting.
      Yes, under pressure, Jamie McIntyre was forced to (seemingly) recant by saying, “Only a fool would deny that a plane hit the Pentagon!”, which meant that he had been a fool for believing the network was interested in the truth. He retired shortly thereafter.
  28. Charlotte NC Bill
    August 21, 2014 - 1:57 am
    As Gen. Stubblebein said, ” the media is saying what they’re told to say about 9-11″….and that goes for everything else…7/7, the Boston bombing, Sandy Hook…It’s amazes me that anyone still uses the controlled msm for anything besides sports, movie reviews and the comics section…I’m nostalgic about LI Newsday having delivered it as a boy ( after school…who would tolerate that type of “yesterday’s news now? ) but as far as being a NEWSpaper it’s worse than worthless.
    • stephanaugust
      August 21, 2014 - 2:54 am
      “It’s amazes me that anyone still uses the controlled msm for anything besides sports, movie reviews and the comics section…”
      What if the msm only appears to be used that much (because we can not avoid to see the msm because it is present everywhere) and would be broke if it was not government controlled and governement funded?
  29. bobeejoe
    August 21, 2014 - 1:07 am
    Gage must have pissed off Fetzer! Although, he really does look suspicious at this point!.(Gage)
You must be logged in to post a comment Login
<SCRIPT LANGUAGE='JavaScript1.1' SRC='http://fw.adsafeprotected.com/rjss/dc/24870/2077806/adj/N7096.8427.TRIBALFUSION.COM/B8034178.107124518;abr=!ie;sz=300x250;ord=1159269540?' ></SCRIPT>

Veterans Today Poll

For over 60 years, US Taxpayers have been funding Israel, Palestine and Middle East. Are you happy with return on investment or would you prefer those monies be invested at home instead?

Archives

Featured Columnists


Money News Now


at

No comments:

Post a Comment