Re: Last Word on 9-11 Commission -- Without 9-11 Investigators' Input its Conclusions are but Uninformed Opinion
Dick Eastman
. "The pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except
in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of
domestic well-being. Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly
multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus
on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and
widely perceived direct external threat."
"It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic
abroad. This limits the use of America's power, especially its capacity for
military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained
international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that
commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or
challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic
self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties,
even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to
democratic instincts."
---- Zbigniew Brzezinski, from The Grand Chessboard; American Primacy And
It's Geostrategic Imperatives
"Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be
dreaded, because it comprises and develops
the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed
debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments
for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war too, the
discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing
out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of
seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people.
The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality
of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war,
and in the degeneracy of manners and morals, engendered by both. No nation
could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare."
--James Madison, April 20, 1795
(Works. Vol. 4, Pp. 491-2)
Citizens' 9/11 Inquiry Bulletin - May 3, 2004
> Please forward widely.
>
>
> Contents:
>
> 1. LAUNCH OF "THE 9/11 SHOW" International Citizens' Inquiry Radio
> 2. Presenters and Performers update
> 3. [Fwd: Radio Interview with David Ray Griffin, "The New Pearl
Harbor"
author]
> 4. Appeal for Funds
> 5. Inquiry Passport Registration
> 6. Download Inquiry promotional materials
>
>
> 1. LAUNCH OF 'THE 9/11 SHOW' International Citizens' Inquiry Radio
>
> tune in on-line
> Thurs. May 6, 11:00 am EST
> http://www.ciut.fm/about.html
> or locally in Southern Ontario at 89.5 FM
>
> This is the first of a series of radio programs leading up to the
International
> Citizens' Inquiry Into 9/11, May 25 - 30, 2004, Toronto, Canada.
>
> CIUT has been extremely helpful in promoting the Inquiry, and may
offer
live
> broadcasts during the Inquiry. The station will record the whole
Inquiry
and air
> a series of specials at a later date.
>
> ...................................
>
> 2. Presenters and Performers update
>
...
> Nancy White, song writer / performer with new original songs
> Steven (Beating the Bushes) Bush, playwright, performer
>
> Following is an updated list of confirmed presenters. There are
links from
our
> website for more info on most of these.
>
[Especuially recommended by dick
eastman: "*" -- Suspected sell-out "$"]
> Michael C. Ruppert $
> Thierry Meyssan *
> Walter Davis
> Michel Chossudovsky*
> Carol Brouillet $
> Thomas K. Kimmel Jr.
> Mathias Broeckers
> Richard Sanders
> Kee Dewdney. *
> Ian Woods
> Barrie Zwicker
> Ken Jenkins
> Don Paul *
> John McMurtry
> Webster G. Tarpley
> Paul Thompson
> Joyce Lynn
> Jim Hoffman *
> Ken Fernandez
> Nick Levis
> Ellen Mariani and her lawyer,
> Phil Berg
> Bruce Gagnon
> Jamey Hecht
> Jim Marrs
> Rocco Galati
> Dr. Robert Bowman
>
> Performers
>
> Tuesday, May 25 evening
> David Rovics, folk singer
> The Dope Poet Society, local hip hop group
> Jamey Hecht, spoken word artist
> Xena Zwicker, poet
>
> Saturday May 29 evening
>
> Nancy White
> Steven Bush 'Beating the Bushes'
> Helen Porter, story teller (original story)
> Buffy Sainte- Marie (appearance in negotiation)
> and, John Gray, Worldwide best-selling author of "Men are from
Mars,
Women are from Venus"
>
>
>
......................................................................
......
..
>
> 3. [Fwd: Radio Interview with David Ray Griffin, 'The New Pearl
Harbor'
author]
>
> Dear friends,
>
> For those of you who have not read David Ray Griffin's amazing new
book,
> The New Pearl Harbor, you can now listen online to an excellent 40
minute
> interview with him which was aired on KPFA in Berkeley, CA. This
book,
> which presents the facts surrounding 9/11 in a most balanced,
> dispassionate way, is already creating huge waves. It discusses
what the
> Bush Administration knew, when they knew it, and how the current
> investigation is playing out.
>
> To hear the interview, go to
>
> http://www.flashpoints.net/archive/archive-2004-03-31.html
>
> Go to minute 16:30 for start of interview with Griffin. I have
already
> purchased 27 copies of this book and plan to buy more. You can
order the
> book at:
>
>
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1566565529/102-5947862-
1271341?v=glance
>
> The over 40 reader's reviews on amazon.com demonstrate clearly that
this
> is a book which is waking people up in a very big way. I encourage
you to
> at least click on the above link and read some of the reviews
towards the
> bottom of the page. The New Pearl Harbor is rated five stars out of
five,
> and has reached amazon.com's top 100 best seller list several
times. This
> book has the potential to transform this entire world through
exposing the
> depth of deception at high levels. Please help spread the news.
Great
> things are happening in the world!
>
> With very best wishes,
> Fred
> (9/11 Inquiry supporter)
>
>
......................................................................
......
>
> 4. Appeal for Funds from Phil Gillies, Fundraising and Promotion
Coordinator
>
> The International Citizens' Inquiry Into 9/11 in Toronto May 25-30
urgently needs
> your financial support.
>
> This ambitious project is citizen-conceived, citizen-run, and
citizen-funded.
>
> People like you and me are going to make it happen.
>
> My immediate and urgent appeal to you is for a donation as large as
you
can make
> it. The need is now. Our Inquiry could, in this U.S. election
year,
impact on
> world events.
>
> The Citizens' Inquiry brings together a broad coalition of people
who
question
> the U.S. Government's version of the events of 9/11.
>
> Your contribution, large or small, is vital to our success.
>
> Make a donation today and ensure that this Inquiry is front-page
news, as
the San
> Francisco Inquiry was in March.
>
> To make your donation:
>
> Mail a cheque or money order (made out to 911inquiry.org) to:
>
> 911inquiry.org
> 7B Pleasant Boulevard, Box 958,
> Toronto, ON, Canada M4T 1K2.
>
> Telephone the Inquiry at 416-963-5562
> or (toll free in North America) 1-866-234-7438
>
> and using your credit card to donate.
> We can accept VISA, MasterCard and American Express.
>
> You may also email us at info@9...
>
> We thank you for your generous support. We look forward to saying
thank
you by
> sending you a special acknowledgement letter and receipt. If you
wish it,
we
> would also like to offer you a personalized certificate suitable for
framing with
> the text,
> "I Helped Expose the Truth About 9/11."
>
> Should you have any questions, please call Phil Gillies,
Fundraising and
> Promotion Coordinator at (416) 963-5562, toll-free at 1-866-234-
7438, or
email
> pg@9...
>
> Thank you for your help!
>
> ....................................................
>
> 5. Inquiry Passport Registration.. Coming very soon!
>
>
> Please call us if you have questions, comments, suggestions, or
donations.
> toll free N. America 1-866-234-7438
>
> .........................................
>
> 6. Download Inquiry promotional materials
>
> Please download, print and distribute widely our posters and flyers.
>
> http://www.911inquiry.org/materials.html
>
> Thank you,
> Kelly Reinhardt
>
> http://www.911inquiry.org
>
> 7B Pleasant Boulevard, Box 958
> Toronto, Ontario, Canada
> M4T 1K2
>
> toll free in North America
> 1-866-234-7438
>
> local, or other long distance
> 416-963-5562
"Dick Eastman" <de1...@nwinfo.net> wrote in message news:...
> "I don't know something called International Principles. I vow that I'll
> burn every Palestinian child (that) will be born in this area. The
> Palestinian woman and child is more dangerous than the man, because the
> Palestinian childs existence infers that generations will go on, but the
man
> causes limited danger. I vow that if I was just an Israeli civilian and I
> met a Palestinian I would burn him and I would make him suffer before
> killing him. With one hit I've killed 750 Palestinians (in Rafah in 1956).
I
> wanted to encourage my soldiers by raping Arabic girls as the Palestinian
> women is a slave for Jews, and we do whatever we want to her and nobody
> tells us what we shall do but we tell others what they shall do."
>
> [Ariel Sharon, current Prime Minister, In an interview with General Ouze
> Merham, 1956]
>
> ===============
>
> Here is the critical information needed to derive an informed opinion of
> what really happened on September 11, 2001:
>
> Consider what citizen investigators have uncovered regarding the alleged
> "attack" on the Pentagon:
>
>
> 1. Pentagon security camera shows
> a. Too short a plane
> b. Smoke trail of a missile being fired
> c. White-hot flash explosion consistent with a missile warhead
>
> 2. Photos show wrong crash imprint in the wall
>
> 3. Photos show and wrong flash-powder burn darkening the wall
>
> 4. Downed lampposts and witnesses each identified a different
> approach path to the Pentagon, the Boeing's and the killer jet's
>
> 5. Wrong kind of debris
>
> 6. Single piece of right kind of debris shown to have been
> found on the opposite side of the approach path from
> the side of the plane where that particular piece had
> to have come from.
>
> 7. Witnesses also
>
> a. heard a missile
>
> b. heard a sonic boom prior to blast
>
> c. smelled burning chordite after the blast
>
> d. saw a radar blip behaving like a jet-fighter blip
>
> 8. No photos of wreckage from inside consistent with the crash
>
> 9. Evidence of only one engine and one seat , a pilots seat.
>
> 10. A distraction plane, ur engine plane making dives over D.C.
> both photographed, videotaped and shown on BBC, and
> reported (erroneously) by many wintesses as the actual plane
> "diving at an irrecoverable angle)
>
> 11. The attack was made almost horizontally into the first-floor
> level -- consistent with a countour-hugging jet-fighter attack
>
> 12. Normal rescuers were prevented from entering the building
> while only certain people, including Rumsfeld himself, conducted
> (screened) victims from the building
>
> 13. Rumsfeld had recently been given exclusive power to
> OK air interceptions -- and yet he was in his office the whole
> time the twin towers were hit, and when the Pentagon was
> hit he went to oversee "rescue" instead of going to the situation
> room where his interception authority could be given -- he
> arrived at the situation room at about the time the Pennsylvania
> plane (backup for the Pentagon) was finally shot down.
>
> 14. The various drills and practices for an air attack on the Pentagon
> including some kind of simulation on 9-11-01 itself, coupled with
> denials that such an attack had been considered possible.
>
> 15. Impossible stories by, for example, John Judge (regarding
> his amazing stewardess friend who claims to have seen the
> Boeing inside the hole, recognized the plane as the one she
> always flew, recongized her stewardess friend as a victim by
> a photo of her severed arm with the matching "friendship
> bracelett" they both wore; that she was passing out
> doughnuts and coffee to the rescue workers with the salvation
> army when the salvation army was nowhere in evidence at the
> scene -- John Judge who is a professional JFK conspiracy
> theory debunker and discloses that this same stewardess
> friend is also a JFK theory investigator, the same
> John Judge who launched the phony "People's Investigation
> of 9-11 with a press conference by stating that the
> Pentagon attack is not something responsible investigators
> should bother investigating etc. since we "know" the Boeing
> hit the Pentagon and don't want to be a laughing stock etc.
> -- the People's investigation that never once reviewed any
> of the evidence packages I posted to them -- the same
> John Judge who to this day refuses to debate Dick Eastman
> on any internet forum and whom all -- dare I use the term
> -- "responsible" 9-11 investigators think is a John Judge
> who is working for the coverup, for obstruction of justice,
> and because he does it so badly is himself become one of
> the proofs of the frameup along with the known- only-to-
> himself flight attendant who works one of the flights that
> most definitely had to have been regularly monitored by
> US intelligence operatives, probably flight attendents, and
> this one just happened not to take Flight 77 that day by
> happenstance etc. -- so how about it, Mr. Judge?
> [John Judge is also the only 9-11 investigator (so-called --
> he hasn't contributed anything by the unconfirmed statements
> of his unnamed stewardess friend), the only "conspiracy
> theorist" who has taken upon himself to "shield" witnesses
> victim families from irresponsible inveisigators -- getting
> (somehow!) the addressesof all of them and contacting them --
> and deciding NOT to share any of the Pentagon evidence
> described here with them and effectively blocking other
> investigators not screen by him against "small-plane"
> theorists like me, Jim Hoffman, Prof. Dewdney etc.
> 16. The deaths of only the CIA's indepdendent intelligence
> revivals , the Offices of Naval Intelligence personel, and
> auditors of defense spending contracts etc. alone moved
> into the "newly renovated" section that was hit -- on the side
> where most of the witnesses would be the Arlington Cemetery
> dead or people involved with driving their cars. Naval Intelligence
> would have independently investigated 9-11 had they lived --
> the investigator that no official has yet conducted -- Wolfowitz
> sure bin Laden had done it and ready with the solution of invading
> Afganistan on the very first day -- even as they were allegedly taken
> by complete suprise only a few hours before that determination.
>
>
> See the evidence photos and witness testimony confirming all of the above
> and further analysis in support of these conclusions by respected men of
> science here:
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TRUTHBAZOOKA/message/5
>
> and here
>
> http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html
>
> The U.S. 9-11 Commission -- originally planned to be headed by
> Henry Kissinger who once said, "It is not a matter of what is true
> that counts, but a matter of what is perceived to be true." -- has
> never acknowledged publically the existence of citizens with
> photographic evidence they claim establishes
> that 9-11 to have been frame-up.
>
> Al Felzenberg has been the gatekeeper and triage of all information
> directed to the Committee -- note the Jewish name and realize that the
Bush
> administration would not select one of the 45 percent of Jews who oppose
the
> current wars of conquest against Moslem nations -- must be held
accountable
> for active obstruction of justice, for assisting in a coverup of evidence
> that fingers the true perpetrators.
>
> The Commission, I conclude, and I am confident future impartial history
will
> bear me out, has had only two objectives from the beginning:
>
> 1. To consumate the cover-up; and
>
> 2. To provide contrived rationale for consolidation of police power into a
> Stalinist "NVKD"-type police state, unanswerable to anyone, the operations
> and objectives of which are unknown to anyone, and the control of which
> remains in the hands of America's power-elite Oligarcy, the proven
> perpetrators of 9-11.
>
> Dick Eastman
> 223 S. 64th Ave.
> Yakima, Washington 98908
>
> =========================
Dick Eastman
Nick,
You have a very important compilation of evidence here -- although I am not
able to
download any of the pictures.
This is a significant contribution, although I am sorry that you do not
accept my
analysis of the Pentagon attack and that you accept the webfairy-Spanish
analysis
that mistakes reflections as real objects on the side of Flight 175 that
crashed
into South Tower. By not coming out for the best evidence you do, I am
sorry to
have to say, muddy the waters.
Two points in particular were revelations to me, that fit with other facts
as
follows:
Here is another mystery solved. Where did all the small pieces of debris
come from
what were scattered all over the helipad northwest of the Pentagon crash?
Remember
the wind was blowing from the northwest that day? (Here is a hint: a hugh
C-130
transport plane flew right after the Boeing over the Pentagon just 30
seconds after
the moment of the (killer jet) crash. Clearly the C-130 dropped the small
shards
-- that is, those shards that were not pieces of the missile casing that was
blown
to smithereens ahead of the killer jet crash.
"All over the highway were small pieces of aircraft skin, none bigger than a
half-dollar" Mark Faram These metal 'confetti' have been blown up high in
the sky
"looked like white confetti raining down everywhere. The 'confetti' was
little bits
of airplane, falling down after being flung high into the bright, blue sky"
Clyde
Ragland
"The sky was darker than normal, but still I didn't think much of it. Then I
saw
little bits of silver falling from the sky" Will Jarvis "There was an
enormous
fireball, followed about two seconds later by debris raining down" Donald R.
Bouchoux www.911-strike.com/missing-confetti.htm
I immediately saw that the bin Laden video was fake -- but the most
important
implication escaped me:
"evidently with no fear that the real person would denounce it."
Bin Laden had to have been dead. He was the perfect target, the perfect
frame-up
prop, since no one else knew he had died -- they could chase him forever
at no
expense of hiding him.
"Death of Bin Laden The funeral of Osama Bin Laden took place on 16th
December 2001
in Pakistan as reported in Pakistani and Egyptian newspapers
www.welfarestate.com/binladen/funeral/ with his last months spent in US
hospitals on
kidney dialysis (see my earlier account for his stay in Dubai hospital in
June
2001). His genuine pronouncements repudiated the idea of attacking civilian
targets.
The Pentagon put out its fake bin-Laden video in November 2001, with a main
character who did not even resemble him, evidently with no fear that the
real person
would denounce it."
Draw the line between Zionists and Jews as you choose -- the news of the
day makes it undeniable that all of the first group and a considerable
subset of the second are conspiring to achieve racist world totalitarian
dictatorship
by Dick Eastman
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
I know Zionists are conspiring racist world totalitarian dictatorship
because Jewish financiers and their hired talent plotted both World Wars
and the Great Depression as my researches* on the life of Jewish financier
and Rothschild agent Bernard Baruch prove
I know Zionists are conspiring racist world totalitarian dictatorship
because the photographic and other evidence** provide multiple lines of
conclusive proof that the Pentagon controlled by Zionist Jews Rumsfeld,
Wolfowitz, Perle, Kissinger, Myers had to have been intimately involved in
the faked jetliner crash at the Pentagon (a jet fighter conducted the attack
while the Boeing overflew the Pentagon and landed one mile away) all so the
United States would bankrupt itself and exhaust the last of its national
life and energy in a Jew-led extermination and enslavement of all of Islam
I know Zionists are conspiring racist world totalitarian dictatorship
because Israel has secretly allied itself with the criminal Triad
princelings of China (whom they themselves set up at the time Lin Piao, the
last true communist, was shot down attempting to flee to the Soviet Union),
Israel giving China all US military secrets, including the neutron bomb and
all commercial secrets, including, under Clinton, the entire set of all US
patents and trade secrets;
I know Zionists are conspiring racist world totalitarian dictatorship
because Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and Kissinger were all in China with Bill
Clinton when that conspiratorial president took his Jewish Secretary of
Defense and his Jewish Secretary of State (Note: significantly Madeleine
Albright claimed not to have known she was Jewish or that her father was one
of Stalin's ruthless comissars until after she had been questioned and
approved by the Sente for the Secretary of State position, and, furthermore,
she claimed to be politically helpful "Catholic" (just like Jewish Kerry)
even though she attended a ruling-elite Episcopalian church under her
gentile identity) on that extended visit to China that lasted an entire
month and had no visible purpose or publicly visible outcome, but where, I
am now certain, the 9-11 Frame-up Conspiracy was actually hatched -- safe
from any possibility of detection by any remaining non-traitor U.S.
investigative law-enforcement
I know Zionists are conspiring racist world totalitarian dictatorship
because just as the phony rigged Florida election dispute in the 2000
presidential election was underway Congress quietly deregulated the entire
derivatives industry in legislation that was never discussed in the Jewish
controlled business and financial news media -- legislation that was
simply waiting for the "cover" provided by the unheard-of nightmare crises
of Presidential election that did not produce a winner (and yes -- all
other states election processes had to be corrupted too in order for Florida
to be the "tie-breaker" state as well as the state where the election would
be determined -- the state of Governor Jeb Bush and Janet Reno and the
Jewish-Cuban-Chinese-Mafia druglords.
Kerry, like Clinton, has been groomed young John Kerry for his political
role as Jewish conspiracy agent.. First, they changed his family name to
Kerry, from Kohn, gaving him a fictitious Irish name, great for political
effect because Massachusetts has a strongly Irish population. The name John
Forbes Kerry, was chosen for him so his initials would be "JFK," to
subconsiously implant in people's minds the Kennedy mystique. And he was not
raised in Boston, but in a private school in Switzerland. And who but the
Jewish controlled media could bill this pro-war, pro-occupation,
pro-more-wars, Zionist bonesman whose wife owns (Heinze) a multinational
corporation that has removed most of its production from the US etc. ****
footnotes:
* Bernard Baruch was the mastermind operative of the big London and Wall
Street banks who, more than any other hundred men, shaped the
defense-industry-debt-financing warplex that ruined the entire 20th century.
Here is the audio link to a broadcast of Radio Free America (Tom Valentine)
discussing that topic and the in-depth quoted references substantiating
every claim made:
Interview with Tom Valentine regarding Bernard Baruch (the key to
understanding the reign of evil throughout the 20th Century )
Oct. 6, 2002 - Bernard Baruch - Dick Eastman talks about this famous figure.
(Streaming)
http://arc3.m2ktalk.com/val1002/6.ram
Bernard Baruch master war-profiteer and architect of depressions, world
wars, cold war and the nuclear arms race my quoted references -- 104 pages
of research findings (adobe acrobat reader will work)
http://www.rfausa.com/Bernard_Baruch.pdf
** Neo-cons of the Pentagon the proven perpetrators in the attack on the
Pentagon
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TRUTHBAZOOKA/message/5
and here
http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html
**** Kerry is Jewish, not Irish, not Catholic, and not a Democrat (unless
declared and never repudiated Maoism is OK credentials for a Democratic
Party presidential candiate these days.) Why the lie -- how can he and
Albright both not have known they were Jewish --why this deception and what
does this deception tell us aobut Kerry and the danger we put ourselves in
when we vote for him or for Bush?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pentagonconspiracy/message/44
General Reference for this message:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pentagonconspiracy/message/37
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pentagonconspiracy/message/19
Funny, isn't it, that no one, absolutly no one talks of impeachment or
resignation under pressure for George W. Bush -- criticism stops only at
Rumsfeld, but that man and Wolfowitz are Bush's foreign policies and his
war policies -- they are his Presidency, his world view, the architects of
his administration -- and more than this torture issue -- the perpetrators
of the 9-11 false-flag inside-job war-instigating mass-murderings in New
York and Arlington on 9-11-01.
The US and British governments have received Red Cross reports "month after
month" since the declared end of the Iraq war a year ago, detailing the
abuse and torture of Iraqi prisoners. Yet, with report after report piling
up on their desks, President George W Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair
chose to say nothing in public to condemn what they knew in private.
http://www.sundayherald.com/41906
The British government was told in February of allegations
coalition troops had abused Iraqi prisoners, Prime Minister Tony Blair's
office said Saturday.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?S13154048
Tories demand Hoon explains when he was told about prisoner abuse. --
Whitehall alarmed over report that detainees were hidden from Red Cross --
British military intelligence officers were interrogating prisoners in the
notorious Abu Ghraib jail in Iraq even as the first reports of abuses at the
prison came to light ...
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1212769,00.html
The antiwarcom@yahoogroups moderator began blocking my posts exactly
as a series of attacks on the small-plane thesis were posted to that group,
although at first I could receive mail, my posts were being "disapproved"
individually. However other subscribers to antiwarcom were willing to post
my rebuttal -- which essentially pointed out that I never said any of the
ridicululous and contemptible things that were being attributed to me by
anonymous poster "fromredbird" and "TheGod12345" and which stated the 16
photo-evidence supported proofs of the Boeing overfly and actual attack by
a smaller aircraft equipped with missile. I challenged both of these
posters and another, named "Bob" to answer even one of these points that
have been endorsed by Professor Dewdney, Jim Hoffman. Longspaugh and others
associated with Physics 911 who have also concluded the validity of the
:small- plane"
finding.
Now, still denying I have been banned -- and still banning me -- many
posts have appeared on the group, forwarded to me by subscribers, showing
that, now that I am safely gone and cannot rebutt, they are posting messages
suggesting that I need psychiatric treatment and mentioning that my wife
has insisted that I seek help.
I find it significant that the moderator has no problem with this turn in
the discussion of the small-plane evidence, in that not once offering a
concret objection or counter evidence to any of the 16 lines of proof each
from hard evidence and witness testimony -- the attacks have gone from
fabricated misrepresentations, attributing totally false and ludicrous and
defaming representations of what I claim to be true, to now, in my absense,
attacking my mental stablility while I am blocked from defending myself.
I am not telling you this for my good health, rather I want to point out to
those feeble minded enough to fall for this dirty "number" being worked on
me -- that their very tactic shows their involvment in the coverup -- it
exposes them, despite the occasional post from them saying things they know
we like to hear -- that the moderator of antiwarcom and the operatives who
cooperated in this coordinated attack on the best-case evidence are
working to assist the coverup of the 9-11 mass-murders, are, in effect,
accomplices through willful obstruction of justice, the attempted
suppression of evidence in the greatest treason and mass-murder in our (US)
history.
I ask that every person of good will who is now subscribed to antiwarcom,
immediately unsubscribe by sending in this notice on a blank page:
antiwarcom-...@yahoogroups.com
And I recommend that you same persons of good will reconnect with each
other at the following yahoogroup list"
standforpea...@yahoogroups.com
This group may not be where you choose to stay -- but it will be a good
holding place for everyone until a new home for TRUE anti-war activists can
be found or started.
I do not see how any person can wish to associate himself with a group like
that.
I hope to see your posts at standforpeace.
Remember, being part of a list that is moderated by false disinfo
opposition -- no matter how they know to occassionally keep you hooked by
feeding you some posts with what they know you want to hear -- is exactly
like remaining capitve to a two-party system, where your own party runs the
9-11-perpetrator Oligarchy's stooge with a bundle of "issues"
scientifically formulated by opinion sampling research to keep the majority
bound to the corrupt leadership etc. -- and if you cannot break with the
people who would blind you, who would systematically keep the most vital
information -- the information that could actually bring down the murderous
and enslaving corruption, but insist giving them the gavel in your own
forums -- what
chance is there.
Do you call me OTT? You bet your sweet ass I'm over the top. The term
comes from trench warfare, and it originally ment "on the attack" -- while
those in the trench were blind and inert with rats and lice. World War One
was another profitmaking banker-corporation contrived war, and of course
the only intelligent course of action would have been to rise up out of the
trench and walk home even if shot by the elite officers behind the lines
"holding you to duty." But my over the top attack is not aimed at equally
exploited soldiers of the Kaiser, or at "Moslem Fundamentalist Terrorists"
who do not exist and never have existed -- rather my attack is against the
authors and the perverse incentive system behind all such wars -- against
the financiers and CEOs who perpetrated the 9-11 frame-upusing their Bush,
their Cheney, their
Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz-Perle-Sharon-Blair-Straw-Aschroft-Tenet agents etc.
So whole follow me "overthetop" and boycott the betrayers and usupers of
our cause at antiwar come? WHo the is with me?
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
Every man is responsible to ever other man.
http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TRUTHBAZOOKA/message/5
9-11 Frame-up: The Pentagon Evidence
Here is the critical information needed to derive an
informed understanding of what really happened on
September 11, 2001:
Consider what citizen investigators have uncovered
regarding the alleged "terrorist attack" on the Pentagon:
1. Pentagon security camera shows
a. Too short a plane
b. Smoke trail of a missile being fired
c. White-hot flash explosion consistent with a missile warhead
2. Photos show wrong crash imprint in the wall
3. Photos show and wrong flash-powder burn darkening the wall
4. Downed lampposts and witnesses each identified a different
approach path to the Pentagon, the Boeing's and the
killer jet's -- also: the witnesses, seeing the
Boeing over the Sheraton Hotel, the Naval Annex, the Citgo gas station,
and the
small section of Arlington Cemetery between the gas station and the
Annex means
it would have been impossible for the aircraft to have hit the
Pentagon west wall
at the oblique 55-60 degree angle determined by the ASCE structural
engineering
team as the angle of entry of the actual killer jet.
5. Wrong kind of debris
6. Single piece of right kind of debris shown to have been
found on the opposite side of the approach path from
the side of the plane where that particular piece had
to have come from.
7. Witnesses also
a. heard a missile
b. heard a sonic boom prior to blast
c. smelled burning chordite after the blast
d. saw a radar blip behaving like a jet-fighter blip
8. No photos of wreckage from inside consistent with the crash
9. Evidence of only one engine and one seat , a pilots seat.
10. A distraction plane, a large four-engine plane was making
dives over D.C. at exactly the time of the attack; both
photographed, videotaped and shown on BBC, and reported
(erroneously) by many witnesses as the actual plane
"diving at an irrecoverable angle)
11. The attack was made almost horizontally into the first-floor
level -- consistent with a countour-hugging jet-fighter attack
12. Normal rescuers were prevented from entering the building
while only certain people, including Rumsfeld himself,
conducted (screened) victims from the building
13. Rumsfeld had recently been given exclusive power to
OK air interceptions -- and yet he was in his office the
whole time the twin towers were hit, and when the
Pentagon was hit he went to oversee "rescue" instead
of going to the situation room where his interception
authority could be given -- he arrived at the situation
room at about the time the Pennsylvania plane (back-up
only-to himself flight attendant who works one of the flights
that
most definitely had to have been regularly monitored by
US intelligence operatives, probably flight attendents, and
this one just happened not to take Flight 77 that day by
happenstance etc. -- so how about it, Mr. Judge?
16. The deaths of only the CIA's indepdendent intelligence
revivals , the Offices of Naval Intelligence personel, and
auditors of defense spending contracts etc. alone moved
into the "newly renovated" section that was hit -- on the side
where most of the witnesses would be the Arlington Cemetery
dead or people involved with driving their cars. Naval
Intelligence
would have independently investigated 9-11 had they lived --
the investigator that no official has yet conducted -- Wolfowitz
sure bin Laden had done it and ready with the solution of
invading
Afganistan on the very first day -- even as they were allegedly
taken by complete suprise only a few hours before that
determination.
See the evidence photos and witness testimony confirming
all of the above and further analysis in support of these conclusions by
internationally respected American men of science here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TRUTHBAZOOKA/message/5
and here
http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html
THE PENTAGON EVIDENCE IS THE ACHILLES HEEL BY WHICH
WE BRING DOWN A CRIMINAL OLIGARCHY THAT HAS MADE NO
OTHER FATAL MISTAKE -- WE HAVE TO PRESS HOME OUR
ONLY ADVANTAGE -- THE PENTAGON EVIDENCE ALONE CAN
RALLY HUMANITY TO TAKING A UNIFIED MASS STAND FOR
JUSTICE AND PEACE AND FREEDOM FROM THE ELITES WHO
HAVE RUINED THE LAST TWO CENTURIES OF HUMAN
EXISTENCE.
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
Every man is responsible to every other man.
Dick Eastman
Here is the multiple lines of "best-evidence" implicating the United States
Pentagon leadership in the "9-11" attack on the Pentagon itself.
I believe that there is no more effective way to end the violent and
criminal Anglo-American foreign policies than by exposing with multiple
lines of photographic and other hard evidence establishing the complicity,
the active involvement, of top civilian leadership of the US military in
the deadly attack on the Pentagon of 11 September, 2001.
I give you the following evidence links and an index of the proofs found
therein.
I will not be writing to you again, although I am at your service
individually, should you have questions about any of the following.
Please note that this is not a formal write-up, but merely a memorandum to
alert you to the existence of this body of "best-evidence" information.
Include several links to many formal write ups, such as those at Physics911.
Yours sincerely,
Richard P. Eastman M.S., M.A.
USA
===================================
Here is the critical information needed to derive an informed
opinion of what really happened on at the Pentag on
September 11, 2001:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TRUTHBAZOOKA/message/5
http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html
INDEX OF PROOF
1. Pentagon security camera shows
a. Too short a plane
b. Smoke trail of a missile being fired
c. White-hot flash explosion consistent with a missile warhead
2. Photos show wrong crash imprint in the wall
3. Photos show and wrong flash-powder burn darkening the wall
4. Downed lampposts and witness consensus each identify
a different approach path to the Pentagon, the Boeing's
and the killer jet's and they are mutually incompatible --
(path of sighted Boeing also inconsistent with civil
engineers reported "50 degree- angle of entry" -- witnesses
reporting the Boeing coming over the Sheraton Hotel, the
Naval Annex, the Citgo gas station, and the southernmost
extremity of Arlington National Cemetery -- an angle much
closer to perpendicular to the wall)
5. Wrong kind of debris
6. Single piece of right kind of debris shown to have been
found on the opposite side of the approach path from
the side of the plane where that particular piece had
to have come from.
7. Witnesses also
a. heard a missile
b. heard a sonic boom prior to blast
c. smelled burning chordite after the blast
d. saw a radar blip behaving like a jet-fighter blip
8. No photos of wreckage from inside consistent with the crash
9. Evidence of only one engine and one seat , a pilots seat.
10. A distraction plane, a four- engine plane making dives
over D.C. both photographed, videotaped and shown
on BBC, and reported (erroneously) by many wintesses
as the actual plane "diving at an irrecoverable angle)
11. The attack was made almost horizontally into the first-floor
level -- consistent with a countour-hugging jet-fighter attack
12. Normal rescuers were prevented from entering the building
while only certain people, including Rumsfeld himself, conducted
(screened) victims from the building
13. Rumsfeld had recently been given exclusive power to
OK air interceptions -- and yet he was in his office the whole
time the twin towers were hit, and when the Pentagon was
hit he went to oversee "rescue" instead of going to the situation
room where his interception authority could be given -- he
arrived at the situation room at about the time the Pennsylvania
plane (backup for the Pentagon) was finally shot down.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TRUTHBAZOOKA/message/5
and here
http://www.cosmicpenguin.com/911/Eastman/m18h05.html
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington
Dick Eastman
So far it is the only response I have received. Ruppert, Jared Israel,
Rivero, Judge, Harvey, and Sarah Roberts so far have not responded.
Mark is not an investigator known to me, but I am grateful for the chance to
engage with someone in a discussion of the small-plane evidence and the
frame-up it exposes.
> Mark Robinowitz posts:
>
> At 9:48 PM -0700 2004-05-10, sf911trut...@riseup.net wrote:
>>Dick Eastman posts:
>>
>>Subject: INDEX OF BEST EVIDENCE 9-11 Pentagon
>
>
>
DE:
>> Please note that this is not a formal write-up, but merely a memorandum
> to alert you to the existence of this body of "best-evidence"
> information. Include several links to many formal write ups, such as
> those at
>>Physics911.
>
>
MR:
>Physics 9/11 is a website that asserts that a missile caused a plane
> like imprint on the WTC north tower. There are numerous photos of the
> north tower that clearly show the impact caused by large wings. This is
> so easy to debunk that it raises serious questions about the intent (or
> sanity) of the "missile attacked the WTC" advocates.
DE:
Well, Mark, then we agree that the WTC towers where hit by airliners.
This to me is obvious. I am glad it is to you too. I speak of Physics911
merely as the place where Jim Hoffman and A.K.Dewdney have posted
on the Pentagon, two "small-plane" theorists. I am not even familiar
with the arguments that are made at that site about the WTC.
MR:
> Muddying the waters is an old tactic to confuse people from looking
> at the most credible material.
DE:
Another point on which we are in strong agreement.
MR:
>>You have each denigrated the finding that the Boeing 757 overflew the
> Pentagon as a smaller aircraft, armed with missiles, was crashing
> directly below. I am convinced that in light of the following
> compilation of independent lines of proof from a variety of evidence and
> testimony, that your possition is not longer tenable.
>
>
> I seriously doubt that Mr. Eastman has ever been to this area.
DE:
Now you can be certain. I never have had the honor of visiting our
nation's capitol.
MR:
> If he
> had, he might realize that thousands of people would have seen the
> overflight of this plane, since there are large highways full of
> commuters, rapid rail line, and numerous large office buildings full of
> military officials and contractors --
DE:
Thousands did not see the crash, so why should that number have
seen the flyover? Many photos from different angles -- all of which
I supply readers -- show the topography of the crime scene. And I
have the account of three witnesses, each of whose observations
figure in my conclusions (Lagasse, Faram, Riskus)
MR:
> many of them would have noticed the hitherto unprecedented flight
> of a jet coming from the direction of the Pentagon in a place that
> planes do not normally fly.
DE:
I have given the witnesses statements of those who noticed the
plane coming in outside of the normal path of incoming airliners
at Reagan National. You are right. Several did notice.
And many saw the Boeing come in over the Sheraton Hotel, over
the Naval Annex, over the Citgo gas station, over the head of
the gardener cutting the grass along the southmost piece of
Alrington Cemetery between the Annex and the gas station,
There reported observation of the path of the Boeing as it
approached the Pentagon rendevous is just one line of proof
that the Boeing was not the killer jet. You see, if the plane
came in over those locations then a) it could not have hit the
first lamppost that was knocked down (which had been standing
at the southest corner of the bridge in the center of the Pentagon
parking access cloverleaf; and 2) it could not have come in at
the 55-degree angle that civil engineers have identified as the
angle at which the true killer jet made its first-floor entry.
So these many witnesses where there, and their testimony
supports the "small-plane" finding.
There is one point where I beg to differ. Very few saw the
actual crash because
1) Washington Blvd. rises to allow the underpass to the
parking area -- so that those who noticed the Boeing from
the Columbia Pike and highway 395 could not see the
first-floor level where the killer jet hit;
2) Most of the area west of the west wall is Arlington Cemetery,
i.e., dead people;
3) Many were distracted by the act of driving -- and minds not
expecting things often miss them, especially in a frame of
just a few seconds.
MR:
> It is near National Airport, but planes landing there don't pass that
> direction. Also, they need more time to lower their landing gear -
> planes need more than a mile to accomplish this.
DE: This is true and it would be noticed by those who think about
those things -- the cars headed East towards the 14th-street bridge
would be used to landing jetliners at the bridge -- not everyone would
have the presence of mind to think about a plane out of place in
so short a time span, although some did. You are not saying anything
that has not been taken into account and that has not been discussed
hundreds of times.
>
DE:
>>It would be most helpful to the world situation if you each would make
> public retractions of your former misguided criticisms of these
>>now-established findings.
DE:
Yes, they really should. I hope they do.
DE:
>>I am sure you realize how much misery in the world is being prolonged
> because of resistance to these facts, owing to your earlier resistance.
DE:
Also true. Why do they hold back?
MR:
> No doubt it is all the fault of 9/11 skeptics who don't accept Mr.
> Eastman's assertions based on questionable inference and in some
> cases easily disproven material as gospel truth.
DE:
Actually, Mark, I was the sceptic -- the man sceptical about the official
9-11 story, and I then examined the evidence and confirmed by scepiticism
and made my findings available to everyone. I debunked the
fiction of the crashing Boeing.
You characterize my data-derived conclusions as "assertions." An
assertion is a statement one makes about something that is
in question. Far from "asserting," I am demonstrating something
merely by pointing to the photographic evidence which tells
exactly what happened simply by direct inspection. You know the
drill: "Too-short a plane, visible missile smoke trail, inappropriate
white flash and all the other impossible inconsistencies that
disprove the official story.
Also, when one "asserts" something to be true -- it means they
state it to be true emphatically but without evidence. That most
certainly is not the case here.
MR:
> Self-righteousness directed at one's ostensible allies is a poor
> strategy for building alliances.
Are you familiar with the history of the exchanges between Ron Harvey,
Sarah Roberts, Mike Rivero, Jared Israel, Joe Vialls and myself?
Harvey was calling me a whacko long before I even heard of him.
Sarah Roberts likewise put up her site, not totally discredited,
characteristically withdrawing for a period every time I pointed out
an error -- such as having the Boeing make ten degrees of
turn all while over the highway cloverleaf.
Mike Rivero and I were cooperating together, exchanging views,
when suddenly he accussed me of being an agent working
against him, and cut off all communication -- refusing to look
at the information I showed him -- and posting totally bogus
and easily refutable brush-off arguements, which when I
did expose them he would not own up to.
And none of them ever engaged the key arguments presented
point by point.
DE:
>>1. Pentagon security camera shows
>> a. Too short a plane
>> b. Smoke trail of a missile being fired
>> c. White-hot flash explosion consistent with a missile warhead
>
MR:
> This is from one of the participants in the 9/11 inquiry in SF ...
>
DE:
And E=MC2 is from the writer of you high-school science book, right?
The fact is that I am the first to have noted the missile trail on the
internet.
I am one of the first to remark on the white-hot initial explosion being
inappropriate for an aluminum plane with kerosene hitting a brick, concrete,
limestone office building.
I was the first with both arguments for the too-short plane:
1) The "Stegosaurus proof" of the parking pass machine in the forground
only covering a length of not quite five tail fins in a row, when a Boeing
757
is longer than six tail fins would be aligned along its back; and
2) the fact that the plane in the security cam picture #1 is obviously
shorter
than the height of the Pentagon (71'ft.) like the F-16, whereas the Boeing
757 is a tad over twice as long as the building is high (155 ft.)
That should settle everying, right there. But people pretended not
to get it, and so I looked for and found more than a half dozen other
proofs that the Boeing did not crash.
> I am aware that the five photos from the Pentagon
> security camera are faked, but there are way more than
> five photos. The earlier photos (and videos) that
> appeared on television right after the hit are the ones
> that clearly prove (to me) that no 757 hit the Pentagon.
Your "awareness" is not good enough for me. I believe the Pentagon
spokesman was not lying when he said that the pictures show substantially
what was in the originals. I believe that what they did was to select only
sequence shots that do not show the killer jet, being careful to pick
exactly a shot where the plane is concealed behind the parking-pass machine
(except for the tail fin). The dates and times were modified to conceal the
fact that the selection of shots are not the complete sequence.
People have made a lot of "discoloration" in the second shot -- but this
is the result of the bright "flash powder" effect of the white hot
explosion -- it brightens the entire landscape, which reflects it in all
directions -- doubtless to blind the observers for the two seconds
necessary for the Boeing to "dissappear" behind the subsequent red and
orange flames and the black smoke from the crash and jet fuel.
All of this has been gone over again and again for the last since March of
2002, when the video shots were released.
MR:
> My feeling has been all along that the faked photos were
> released purposely to muddy the waters.
DE:
That's your feeling? Well, there is one thing, Dick Eastman cannot disprove
and which forces me to admit defeat : Disproving Mark Robinowitz's feeling.
What can I say? "All along," eh? And with that feeling did you ever
experience curiosity about why Mssrs. Rumsfeld, Wolfowtiz, and Myers might
wish to "muddy the waters?" Or don't feelings ever yield analytical next
steps?
MR:
> The Pentagon
> knew these photos would be picked up by skeptics as
> "proof" and that they would also be easily dismissed by
> others as fake (they even changed the date to September
> 12th).
DE:
Gee. You seem to get right into their minds. But again, why would they
take these evasive "muddying" measures? And why would they risk detection
in changing something critical -- where they would be liable. Don't you
think they have lawyers (like Ted Olsen) advising them on how to proceed?
The released the true frame that happened not to show the small plane that
they did not want people seeing. REMEMBER -- THEY DID NOT RELEASE THESE
PICTURES AT ALL, UNTIL THE FRENCH APPEARED TALKING ABOUT THE SMALL HOLE AND
STATING THAT THERE WAS "NO PLANE" -- they released these pictures under
pressure -- showing us the only shot they could provide that showed that
there was a plane, but that did not show enough to determine what kind of
plane (or so they thought).
MR:
> But again, I am not basing my belief on these faked
> photos, but rather on the earlier photos.
DE:
So Mark is a man with a belief!
Are "beliefs" better than "assertions," Mark?
At any rate, there are no earlier photos. Unless you mean,
the photos that were made available to the public earlier,
i.e., the photos taken by witnesses who had cameras in
their cars or , like Faram, brought them down before the
wall collapsed.
MR:
> Either way, though, they have certainly succeeded in
> muddying the waters so much that you are probably right
> it is better to focus on WHERE the Pentagon was hit.
DE:
I have seen and provided you all with all of the best photos,
and from that evidence, arranged for the most informing juxtapositions,
THE FACT IS THAT ALL OF THE EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY
TELLS A CONSISTENT STORY -- EACH PIECE OF EVIDENCE,
EACH PROOF DERIVED FROM THAT EVIDENCE SUPPORTS,
CORROBORATES, IS CONSISTENT WITH, CONFIRMS ALL
THE OTHER PARTS.
DE:
Look at each of the numbered items 1 through 16 and you
will see what I mean -- that is unless you let your "feelings"
get in the way.
>
DE:
>> witnesses reporting the Boeing
>> coming over the Sheraton Hotel, the
>> Naval Annex, the Citgo gas station, and the southernmost
>> extremity of Arlington National Cemetery -- an angle much
>> closer to perpendicular to the wall)
>
DE:
Damn! Am I good or what?
MR:
> I haven't heard of any witnesses who report a plane LEAVING from the
> direction of the Pentagon, which is what the "two plane" theory
> requires for it to be true.
DE:
Then you must be of the philosophic school which "asserts" that
the tree does not make sound if it falls in a forest where no ears
are there to hear it.
Not me.
If the audience of hundreds, does not see the flowers disappear into
the hidden pocket sewn into the cape, that is not proof that the hidden
pocket does not exist.
And how much better the magicians of the CIA/MI6/Mossad when
planning a black op as important as this one?
However, you are wrong. It so happens that one witness did say that
he thought the plane went over the building.
And the very first report on Washington D.C. radio stations was that
a jetliner had crashed on the 14th street bridge.
And the very first call to the airport firemen was that a jetliner
had crashed on a runway at the north end airport.
^
S
< E + W >
N
v
AIRPORT
============ * lamppost #1
BRIDGE PENTAGON [] Citgo N. Annex
Sheraton
ARLINGTON CEMETERY
DE:
>>7. Witnesses also
>>
>> a. heard a missile
>>
>> b. heard a sonic boom prior to blast
>>
>> c. smelled burning chordite after the blast
>
MR:
> Some also smelled jet fuel, for what that is worth. Perhaps the
> zionists ran around and poured jet fuel to confuse people.
>
DE: Ah! I see the game. No point in discussing further is there.
Got some Zionists in the family, do you, Mark? Thinking that
it might be uncomfortable for them if the link to Rumsfeld-Wolfowitz
were made too clear? Don't you trust the truth as the
best anti-sceptic for human problems?
Tell me true, Mark -- do you think it would be bad for
Jewish people if it was proved that Rumsfled-Wolfowitz-Perle-Sharon
were proven to be the perpetrators of 9-11?
Would you even allow yourself to entertain that possibility?
Jared Israel has made his choice? He will not engage the
evidence honestly. Now what about you?
MR:
> A much more sensible and accurate commenator, Fletcher Prouty, wrote in
DE:
I thought Prouty died before 9-11 happened?
You are accusing me of being "less accurate" than someone here, Mark.
Name my inaccuracy. Name one case where I have not corrected position
the second new data has come to hand (like about the existence of downed
lampposts or the angle of the hole in "c"-ring what that first became
known on the internet?
You need to state an innacuracy in any of my Pentagon presentation -
or I will have to consider this a deliberate misrepresentation.
MR:
> [Fletcher Prouty, wrote in]
> "the Secret Team" that covert operations that are successful are kept
> small and relatively simple.
DE:
He was right. The 9-11 frame-up caper was a fiasco all the way.
Only you and Jared Israel disagree. They got too cock-sure of
their technology. Same mistake they made in Iraq. Not too swift.
Buy the way, why did you start this group if you won't accpt the
best evidence of a frame-op?
> The more elaborate theories of 9/11 tend
> to be those with less evidence and are more difficult to show how they
> could have been what happened.
You mean Webfairy's Holograms at the WTC , based on the blurry fireman
video.
Are you really trying to say that detectives concluding the "small-plane"
attack
use less evidence than other people? Are your serious -- or are you hoping
that just saying it will make people believe it, regardless of the fact that
it is
very well known to be the exact opposite of the fact.
DE:
Would you consider yourself a Zionist, Mark?
Would a Zionist, allow himself agree with the small-pane thesis, even
if he suspect that it was probably true? even if he were convinced
rationally based on conclusive evidence that it was true?
MR:
> Mr. Eastman does not seem interested in mentioning what is 100%
> provable and undisputed -- the fact the Pentagon was hit in the
> nearly empty part, preferring to focus on the unprovable and disputed
> claims of what did or did not hit the Pentagon (but without any
> primary evidence to back up his theories).
DE:
Aren't my posts long enough without mentioning what is undisputed?
And have your really read my 300,000 posts on the newsgroups and
e-lists to say that I don't mention that the "wedge" that was hit was
rennovated???
And of course what you say is not true. I have often written about
the renovation. I have suggested that the rennovation made it
easier for Mr. Rumsfeld , Mr. Wolfowitz, Gen Myers, Mr. Perle,
Mr. Kissinger, Mr. Gingrich and other masterminds at the Pentagon
just prior to 9-11, to plan exactly who they wanted in the new
section and who they did not. They just gave orders for the
people they wanted dead to be moved to the targeted area.
NOW IF YOU REPLY TO THIS LETTER AT ALL I INSIST THAT
YOU EXPLAIN TO EVERYONE HOW YOU CAME BY YOUR
CONCLUSION THAT I DON'T MENTION THE FACT OF THE
RENOVATION -- WHEN I DID SO ONLY A FEW DAYS AGO,
AND WHEN I HAVE REPORTED IT AND DISCUSSED IT
WITH OTHER INVESTIGATORS AGAIN AND AGAIN
SINCE EVEN BEFORE THE SECURITY VIDEO PICS
WERE RELEASED (I.E. BEFORE MARCH 2002)
SO HOW DID YOU SAMPLE MY WRITINGS TO JUSTIFY
THIS ACCUSATION THAT I DON'T MENTION THIS ITEM?
The fact that the wedge was under rennovation suggests many
possibilities and is suspicious circumstantial evidence --
but it is not the conclusive evidence that a grand jury
would be impressed with. It doesn't directly point to anyone
and it doesn't establish method or motive -- except insofar
as IF THEY WERE TARGETING ONLY ONE PART OF
THE BUILDING -- A BUILDING IN WHICH RUMSFELD
WAS GOING TO BE WHEN THE ATTACK OCCURED,
THEN THEY WOULD WANT A MORE PRECISION MEANS
OF ATTACK -- THE F-16 AND THE MISSILES IT FIRED --
RATHER THAN CRASHING A CLUMSY BOEING 757
WHICH MIGHT SEND AN ENGINE FLYING OVER UNTO
RUMSFELD'S LAP.
But that is just speculation. I like to stick with the incontestable
hard evidence that does not require much deduduction, just
simple inspection of the data to reach the obvious conclusion.
MR:
> I wouldn't hire him to be a professional investigator for a lawsuit.
DE:
I agree. You wouldn't.
I'll have to remember that argument. When someone is arguing
something, make it known that people like him are not going to
be hired because of what they argue. I admit this intimidation
can be very effective with certain types of people.
Where did you learn that trick?
DE:
>>11. The attack was made almost horizontally into the first-floor
>> level -- consistent with a countour-hugging jet-fighter attack
>
RM:
> or a 757 being operated by remote control flight systems
DE:
No. The Boeing is just not responsive enough. The Boeing could
get down to flying level at two or three feet above the ground
after coming down from the seventeen-floorhotel, the five-floor
Annex, and the rise in Washington Blvd. It would be impossible
for that plane to skim that close -- in perfect horizontal flight
across the lawn -- -- no one would risk hitting the lawn
and skidding in -- the remote control could not add to the
existing performance capabilites of the aircraft .
SO HERE IS A SECOND POINT ON WHICH I WANT A CLEAR
ACCOUNTING FROM YOU -- WHAT WAS IN YOUR HEAD,
WHAT INFORMATION WHERE YOU APPEALING TO, WHEN
YOU "ASSERTED" THAT THE 757 COULD PERFORM THIS
AMAZING FEAT OF COMING DOWN OFF THOSE BUILDINGS
ON THE HILL AND OVER THAT RISE IN THE HIGHWAY
AND THEN DIP DOWN SO THAT THE ENGINES ARE
THE HEIGHT OF A DOG'S BACK IN PERFECT HORIZONTAL
FLIGHT BEFORE THE PLANE HAS TRAVERSED HALF
WAY ACROSS THE LAWN (AS SHOWN BY THE VIDEO
CAMERA).
IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT WAS THE BASIS OF YOUR LAST
STATEMENT? WHAT INFORMATION DID YOU HAVE TO
JUSTIFY THAT STATEMENT -- WHICH I SAY IS FALSE
AND WHICH RALPH OMHOLT WHO FLEW THE 757
SAYS IS FALSE.
By the way, where are your responses to my points, 2, 3, 5, 6,
8, 9, 10, 12, 13, and 15???? Am I to assume that you agree
with those proofs?
DE:
>>14. The various drills and practices for an air attack on the Pentagon
>> including some kind of simulation on 9-11-01 itself, coupled with
>> denials that such an attack had been considered possible.
MR:
> That doesn't prove Eastman's theories on the "two planes" theory.
DE: You misunderstand the purpose of the 16 proofs. They prove that
the Pentagon top leadership had to have been complicit in 9-11. The
lies about not having considered such an attack as possible and
the scenario practices that took place proving otherwise, demonstrate
top leadership complicity. The "small-plane" finding (killer jet, plus
Boeing overfly), established in the first three points (actually there
are four proofs of the small plane thesis in the very first point,
above, which is then used to prove Rumsfeld complicity.
I should have made that clearer.
DE:
>>"responsible" 9-11 investigators
>>think is a John Judge who is working for the coverup, for
MR:
> This is reminiscent of cointelpro type tactics, and it either a sign of
> extreme obnoxiousness (mere disagreement on a detail does not
> constitute corruption) or deliberate effort to sow dissension.
DE:
This is reminiscent of cointelpro type tactics, a deliberate effort to
sow dissension.
I know you are aware that John Judge kicked off the "People's Investigation
of 9-11" with the declaration that the P.I.of911 would not waste time
with obvious wastes of time, like the thesis that the Boeign did not crash,
wherein he wrote me and Bosankoe and Fescado and all the rest of us
out of the investigaton and refused to allow the subject to be opened.
When I called them on it, Carol Brouillet assured me that she would
see to it personally that the Pentagon attack would be brought up --
I sent two packets of evidence (most of what you have before you
in my latest package to this forum) -- and sure enough Brouillet
and Judge never did open the discussion of the Pentagon evidence,
of the Bosankoe evidence, as I was calling it calling it at the time.
Judge was calling me irresponsible and putting pressure on
other investigators to dissaccociate themselves from me -- and
that before I even had any contact with him or knew who he was.
And when I answered a statement of his in every particular,
exposing the utter impossibility and ludicrousness of his story
about his flight attendant friend and challenged him to respond --
here merely withdrew from the field -- writing only in forums that
I do not post in, that are denied to me. etc.
Even now, you will notice that Judge has not answered my call
to repudiate his position or defend it.
The only one to come out and engage any of my points, man to man,
has been you, Mark, for which I thank you.
OK, what happens next?
Dick Eastman
Yakima, Washington