PENTAGON VIDEO

PENTAGON VIDEO REVEALS: Anti-Conspiracy Hysteria in Corporate
Media

Crimes of the State

 

From day one, the alleged terrorist strike on the most heavily
defended building in the world has been met with skepticism.

The secrecy and the anomalies associated with "Flight 77"
striking the Pentagon, handing the Bush regime neocons an "Act of War,"
seem a little too convenient to some people -- the kind of people with a frim
grasp of history. Not to mention that the Pentagon was struck more than 80 minutes
after the first hijackings were reported at 8:13am, according to the NY Times.

Let's examine a little history, a little history about the Pentagon
and the people who control it. A document called "Operation
Northwoods" was approved by the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, back during the Kennedy administration (March, 1962).
This historical evidence was released to the public after all that time, which
may have been an oversight on their part. For, it says the following:

"We could blow up
a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba."

"Incidents to establish
a credible attack (not in chronilogical order): 1) Start rumors (many). (...)
5) Blow up ammunition inside the [Guantanamo Bay] base; start fires. 6) Burn
aircraft on air base (sabotage). 7) Lob mortar shells from outside of base
into base. Some damage to installations. (...) 10) Sabotage ship in harbor;
large fires (napthalene). 11) Sink ship near harbor entrance. Conduct funerals
for mock-victims."

(...)

"It is possible
to create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft
has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliner (...) The passengers
could be a group of college students off on a holiday or any grouping of persons
with a common interest (...) At
a designated time the duplicate would be substituted
for the actual civil aircraft and would be loaded with the selected passengers,
all boarded under carefully prepared aliases. The actual registered aircraft
would be converted to a drone."

(...)

"It is possible
to create an incident which will make it appear that Communist Cuban MIGs
have destroyed a USAF aircraft (...) At precisely the same time that the aircraft
was presumably shot down a submarine or small surface craft would
disburse F-101 parts, parachute, etc. (...) Use
of MIG type aircraft by US pilots could provide additional provocation. Harassment
of civil air, attacks on surface shipping, and
destruction of US military drone aircraft by MIG type planes would be useful
as complementary actions."

(...)

"We could
develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in
the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington. (...) We could
sink a boatload of Cubans enroute to Florida (real
or simulated). We could foster attempts on lives of Cuban refugees in th United
States even to the extent of wounding in instances
to be widely publicized. Exploding a few plastic bombs in carefully chosen
spots, the arrest of Cuban agents and the release of prepared documents substantiating
Cuban involvement also would be helpful in projecting the idea of an irresponsible
government."

 

Yes, an "irresponsible government;" I hope
irony isn't lost on you people.

The "Start rumors"
dictum seems to fit precisely the 9-11 scenario. The spy agencies
of twelve nations warned the United States that "Osama bin Laden"
was going to attack America in a "spectacular" fashion. It seemed
that the entire world knew about this attack before it occurred, except for
the people who were supposed to stop it.

Now, let's talk about this new video. There is no way whatsoever
to identify the blurry streak. This begs the question of where are the OTHER
videos, from the hotel camera and from the gas station camera, which were confiscated
by the FBI within minutes of impact (why?) and never seen again. Perhaps on
those video tapes there is something that doesn't fit the official fiction.
Perhaps not. We can't tell at this point.

What we can tell, however, are several things:

1) The corporate mind control media are working overtime to
discredit "conspiracy theories," without the justification of evidence
on their side.

"Flight 77 Not a Hoax" -Daily Telegraph,
Australia

"'CONSPIRACY' GROUNDED" -NY Post

"Videotapes dispel conspiracy" -Washington
Times

"9/11 Pentagon attack video issued to dispel conspiracy
theories" -Radio New Zealand

The New Zealand headline may have it dead on.

However, what's not part of the permissable "analysis"
is that the video is irrelevant to the question of whether or not a "conspiracy"
exists. The government would like to confuse the issue, but logically:

a) If an airliner struck the building, who was in control
of it?

b) Was the plane a "drone" as admittedly feasible
39 years prior to the attacks, in the Northwoods documents?

c) Why wasn't the plane intercepted, or shot down as it approached
the Pentagon?

d) All this blurry video can do is disprove that Flight 77
was the attacking craft; it cannot confirm it.

No matter if the Pentagon was stuck by the plane as claimed,
the complicity of US authorities to allow the attack is neither proven nor disproven
by this evidence. Therefore the headlines run across the world's press are intentional
disinformation.

 

2) "Judicial Watch", the people who requested ALL
the videos, but were only given this stuff, seem more interested in echoing
the government line than in actually watching and analyzing the video evidence:

"But Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton says he hopes
the video ends conspiracy theories that it wasn't actually American Airlines
Flight 77..."

Why is that? Why should Judicial Watch take sides so blatantly,
given the circumstances?

 

3) This video does not appear to show a plane. The images prove
nothing. Forget about identifying "Flight 77" from this blur, you
can't even see an aircraft, any aircraft whatsoever.

Where is the plane?

You mean this white blur?

 

Judicial
Watch thinks it sees some sort of identifying markings on this image. To
wit:

"Department of Defense released a videotape to Judicial
Watch at 1:00 p.m. this afternoon that shows American Airlines Flight 77 striking
the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. "

Oh really? It does not. It shows a white blur that looks more
like a white SUV than any aircraft. It's not very big. It's not silver in color,
as American Airlines planes are, and it does not prove anything about anything.

Judicial Watch -- and all corporate media -- have decided that
the image above is proof enough that "Flight 77" hit the Pentagon.
This would obviously not stand up in a court of law, but then you'd have to
be "crazy" not to believe the Pentagon. Judicial Watch has begun with
the assumption that "Flight 77 hit the Pentagon" and then foisted
this inconclusive evidence onto us in a blatant dare; they dare us to disagree.
They dare us to use our own eyes in the face of the world's press. This is how
September 11th has been forced down our throats since the attacks.

We can call the object that hit the Pentagon "Flight 77,"
although it makes little difference. Whatever impacted there was allowed to
do so by the people in charge. The Pentagon is defended by the world's most
sophisticated radar and communications, by two squadrons of jet fighters at
Andrews Air Base 10 miles away, and by surface to air missiles.

The timing of the 9-11 attacks revealed that there was a "stand
down" of protection. A legitimate hijacked airliner would have been intercepted
within 20 minutes. These procedures are encoded in FAA regulations and in decades
of precedent. Hijackers are not allowed to fly all over the northeast United
States unescorted. The fact that hijackings were known at 8:13am, yet the Pentagon
was not hit until 9:37am, and hit without defensive action of any kind, reveals
high treason.

We were betrayed by warmongers on September 11th. This false
flag attack has precedents such as Northwoods, and it has discernible motives
(world domination through military hegemony, securing of oil reserves, creating
a militarized and aggressive superpower with the support of the population,
demonizing Arabs as monsters, appeasing Israel, etc.) These motives are spelled
out explicitly in Rebuilding America's Defenses, from the Project for the New
American Century, whose members include Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the
president's brother Jeb Bush.

Osama bin Laden (probably dead since Dec. 2001) did not choose
the date "9-11." Those numbers mean nothing to Islamic radicals. The
numbers "911" have meaning to the target audience, Americans in distress.
It is a symbol of victims who need to reach out to the government for salvation.
It is the most important numerical sequence that all children learn in this
country, the life-saving phone number. It is also now the most cynical and treasonous
symbol of Washington debauchery and mass murder. Arrest the executive branch
for high treason, immediately, or this sort of thing can and will happen again.

So let's review the Pentagon attack--

-Five simultaneous war game exercises taking place on the
morning of 9-11-01 (Ruppert, Crossing the Rubicon).

-Draws almost all jet fighter interceptors away from the
northeast US.

-Command goes right up to the office of Dick Chency, placed
in charge of all readiness exercises earlier in 2001 by executive order.

-National Reconnaissance Office is running a plane crashing
into a building "simulation" out of Dulles Airport, the place where
"Flight 77" allegedly took off.

-More than 20 "false blips" reported on FAA flight
controller screens which confuse the personnel as to what is real, or not.

-No defensive action taken to defend the Pentagon from strike.

-Pentagon struck on west wing where reinforcement renovation
is underway, very few personnel, no high value targets.

-Alleged pilot Hanjour could not fly even a Cessna, although
maneuvers of the impacting plane resemble expert jet fighter precision.

-"Air Force Lt. Col. Vic Warzinski, another Pentagon
spokesman, [said]: 'The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was
coming our way, and I doubt prior to Tuesday's event, anyone would have expected
anything like that here.'" --'Newsday,' 23 September 2001.

- "It was after the attack
on the Pentagon that the Air Force then decided to scramble F-16s out of the
DC National Guard Andrews Air Force Base to fly cover, a--a protective cover
over Washington, DC." --NBC Nightly News, (6:30 PM ET) 11 September 11
2001

- "(General Richard) MYERS: Mr. Chairman, the armed forces
did not shoot down any aircraft. When it became clear what the threat was,
we did scramble fighter aircraft, AWACS, radar aircraft and tanker aircraft
to begin to establish orbits in case other aircraft showed up in the FAA system
that were hijacked. But we never actually had to use force.

(Senator Carl) LEVIN: Was that order that you just described
given before or after the Pentagon was struck? Do you know?

MYERS: That order, to the best of my knowledge, was after
the Pentagon was struck." -Senate Armed Services Committee Transcript,
Hearing On Nomination of General Richard Myers to be Chairman of The Joint
Chiefs of Staff

John Doraemi Publishes Crimes of the State at:

http://crimesofthestate.blogspot.com

###