I was at the Arlington County library and listened to your presentation "Firefight: Inside the Battle to Save the Pentagon on 9/11." I'm the one who asked, "what is the best evidence that Flight 77, piloted by an Arab, struck the Pentagon?"
My question is based on the evidence I present to the contrary at http://www.twf.org/News/Y2005/0307-Pentagon.html, and in other articles at The Wisdom Fund web site.
You did not permit me to lay the foundation for my question — which I could have done in about a minute, but you did state that you would be glad to debate me in another forum.
I look forward to it. I live in Pentagon City, and can be reached at 703-521-xxxx.
Monday, June 30, 2008
Saturday, June 28, 2008
Firefight: Inside the battle to save the Pentagon on 9/11
A book review by Enver Masud, founder of The Wisdom Fund
Firefight, by Patrick Creed and Rick Newman, is primarily about the heroic efforts of the firefighters at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. What is of interest to us is the authors' description of the attack on the Pentagon — it contradicts the evidence available to the public.
Creed and Newman write:
- “The plane crossed Washington Boulevard, . . . traveling more than 500 miles per hour and was less than 30 feet off the ground.”
- “the planes wings knocked over several light poles that line the road.”
- “As the Flight 77 flew nearly to ground level, its right wing sliced into a 750 kilowatt generator . . . The plane’s right engine ripped a hole in a fence near the generator . . . the left engine grazed the grass . . . Both wings began to break apart, hurling metal fragments into the air.”
- “The nose of the plane hit the facade, . . . about 14 feet above the ground, going 530 miles per hour.”
- “The airplane’s tail, 45 feet tall, was still attached to the plane as it plowed into the Pentagon.”
- “Along the outer wall, 21-inch-wide concrete columns, . . . stood every ten feet, . . . The impact of the plane knocked out eight of them completely, and severely damaged two others.”
- “The body of the hijacker who had been flying the plane ended up in the D Ring about 107 feet from the point of impact.”
- “The punch-out hole . . . was created by explosive energy”.
In an earlier article, “What really happened at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001,” published by The Wisdom Fund (twf.org), I debunk the theory that Flight 77, a Boeing 757, struck the Pentagon.
Standing in front of the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, Jamie McIntyre, CNN's senior Pentagon correspondent since November 1992, reported: “From my close up inspection there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. . . . . The only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you could pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage - nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon. . . . It wasn't till about 45 minutes later . . . that all of the floors collapsed.”
Arlington County Fire Chief Ed Plaugher, incident commander at the Pentagon on September 11, corroborates Jamie McIntyre's report. At the September 12, 2001, DoD briefing, when asked: "Is there anything left of the aircraft at all?" said: "there are some small pieces of aircraft ... there's no fuselage sections and that sort of thing."
Victoria Clarke, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs — "presenter" of the DoD briefing, did not contradict Chief Plaugher. American Airlines, Flight 77, Boeing, Dulles, and passengers were not mentioned at the briefing.
Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, who from her fifth-floor, B-ring office at the Pentagon, witnessed "an unforgettable fireball, 20 to 30 feet in diameter," was called for stretcher duty. She describes “a strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense, who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a 'missile'. “
Barbara Honegger, military affairs journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, writes that NORAD's: “Gen. Larry Arnold, revealed that he ordered one of his jets to fly down low over the Pentagon shortly after the attack that morning, and that his pilot reported back that there was no evidence that a plane had hit the building.”
Doubts among the firefighters as to what struck the Pentagon are noted by Creed and Newman.
They write: “Denis Griffin . . . had been working in the aftermath of the attack all day, and seen wreckage that looked like it could be from an airplane, but there were so many wild stories going around that he wasn’t sure what to believe.”
Two statements in the book by Creed and Newman are striking:
- “FBI photographer Jennifer Combs (formerly Jennifer Farmer) went far out of her way to pull hundreds of photographs from archives and narrate all of them”.
How did they get access to these photographs, when others have Freedom of Information Act requests pending for these photographs and Pentagon videos?
- “Plaugher came by . . . 'We think it’s al Qaeda,' he said, citing a villain many of them had never heard of.”
What would cause Plaugher, Fire Chief of Arlington County, to make such a statement so soon after 9/11? Plaugher now serves as "a key member of the IAFC Terrorism Committee."
Creed is an amateur historian, volunteer firefighter, and U.S. Army Reserve officer who recently returned from a tour in Iraq as civil affairs officer with the Army’s Special Operation's Command. Newman is an award-winning journalist and staff writer for U.S. News & World Report.
It should be noted, that to this day, the only passenger lists made public have no Arab names on them, Bin Laden is not wanted for 9/11 at the FBI’s Most Wanted, and the only evidence offered by the government to substantiate their claim of Flight 77 having struck the Pentagon is a fuzzy video that proves nothing — indeed the flight recorder data released by the government shows that a plane flew about 400 feet above the Pentagon.
Firefight, by Patrick Creed and Rick Newman, is primarily about the heroic efforts of the firefighters at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. What is of interest to us is the authors' description of the attack on the Pentagon — it contradicts the evidence available to the public.
Creed and Newman write:
- “The plane crossed Washington Boulevard, . . . traveling more than 500 miles per hour and was less than 30 feet off the ground.”
- “the planes wings knocked over several light poles that line the road.”
- “As the Flight 77 flew nearly to ground level, its right wing sliced into a 750 kilowatt generator . . . The plane’s right engine ripped a hole in a fence near the generator . . . the left engine grazed the grass . . . Both wings began to break apart, hurling metal fragments into the air.”
- “The nose of the plane hit the facade, . . . about 14 feet above the ground, going 530 miles per hour.”
- “The airplane’s tail, 45 feet tall, was still attached to the plane as it plowed into the Pentagon.”
- “Along the outer wall, 21-inch-wide concrete columns, . . . stood every ten feet, . . . The impact of the plane knocked out eight of them completely, and severely damaged two others.”
- “The body of the hijacker who had been flying the plane ended up in the D Ring about 107 feet from the point of impact.”
- “The punch-out hole . . . was created by explosive energy”.
In an earlier article, “What really happened at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001,” published by The Wisdom Fund (twf.org), I debunk the theory that Flight 77, a Boeing 757, struck the Pentagon.
Standing in front of the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, Jamie McIntyre, CNN's senior Pentagon correspondent since November 1992, reported: “From my close up inspection there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. . . . . The only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you could pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage - nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon. . . . It wasn't till about 45 minutes later . . . that all of the floors collapsed.”
Arlington County Fire Chief Ed Plaugher, incident commander at the Pentagon on September 11, corroborates Jamie McIntyre's report. At the September 12, 2001, DoD briefing, when asked: "Is there anything left of the aircraft at all?" said: "there are some small pieces of aircraft ... there's no fuselage sections and that sort of thing."
Victoria Clarke, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs — "presenter" of the DoD briefing, did not contradict Chief Plaugher. American Airlines, Flight 77, Boeing, Dulles, and passengers were not mentioned at the briefing.
Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski, who from her fifth-floor, B-ring office at the Pentagon, witnessed "an unforgettable fireball, 20 to 30 feet in diameter," was called for stretcher duty. She describes “a strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense, who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a 'missile'. “
Barbara Honegger, military affairs journalist at the Naval Postgraduate School, writes that NORAD's: “Gen. Larry Arnold, revealed that he ordered one of his jets to fly down low over the Pentagon shortly after the attack that morning, and that his pilot reported back that there was no evidence that a plane had hit the building.”
Doubts among the firefighters as to what struck the Pentagon are noted by Creed and Newman.
They write: “Denis Griffin . . . had been working in the aftermath of the attack all day, and seen wreckage that looked like it could be from an airplane, but there were so many wild stories going around that he wasn’t sure what to believe.”
Two statements in the book by Creed and Newman are striking:
- “FBI photographer Jennifer Combs (formerly Jennifer Farmer) went far out of her way to pull hundreds of photographs from archives and narrate all of them”.
How did they get access to these photographs, when others have Freedom of Information Act requests pending for these photographs and Pentagon videos?
- “Plaugher came by . . . 'We think it’s al Qaeda,' he said, citing a villain many of them had never heard of.”
What would cause Plaugher, Fire Chief of Arlington County, to make such a statement so soon after 9/11? Plaugher now serves as "a key member of the IAFC Terrorism Committee."
Creed is an amateur historian, volunteer firefighter, and U.S. Army Reserve officer who recently returned from a tour in Iraq as civil affairs officer with the Army’s Special Operation's Command. Newman is an award-winning journalist and staff writer for U.S. News & World Report.
It should be noted, that to this day, the only passenger lists made public have no Arab names on them, Bin Laden is not wanted for 9/11 at the FBI’s Most Wanted, and the only evidence offered by the government to substantiate their claim of Flight 77 having struck the Pentagon is a fuzzy video that proves nothing — indeed the flight recorder data released by the government shows that a plane flew about 400 feet above the Pentagon.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Missing 9/11, Pentagon transcript?
The timeline in the "Arlington County After Action Report on the Response to the September 11 Terrorist Attack on the Pentagon" contains this item: "11:00 p.m. Chief Edward Plaugher and Major General James Jackson hold first joint press conference".
We've been unable to locate a transcript of this press conference. We've searched the DOD site http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/index.aspx?mo=9&yr=2001. If you find this transcript, do let us know at staff@twf.org.
We've been unable to locate a transcript of this press conference. We've searched the DOD site http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/index.aspx?mo=9&yr=2001. If you find this transcript, do let us know at staff@twf.org.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Is Pakistan ready for another 9/11?
The Pakistani ambassador in Washington was put on notice early this month that the U.S. would ‘retaliate’ if America suffered such an attack. . . . Part of the concern is that Washington is exaggerating Al Qaeda’s capabilities and that Pakistan could end up entrapped in a manufactured crisis that serves American strategic objectives that do not match Pakistan’s.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
'The truth is out there'
Re Peter Barber, "The truth is out there," Financial Times, June 7, 2008
Please read my letter to the Rocky Mountain News.
Please read my letter to the Rocky Mountain News.
'Very serious 9/11 untruths'
Re Paul Campos, "Very serious 9/11 untruths," Rocky Mountain News, June 18, 2008
I recently returned from a 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour of South Africa where I gave about two talks daily to audiences of several hundred, appeared on several radio stations including SABC, and one interview was broadcast to Sub-Saharan Africa — view at http://www.twf.org/News/News911.html.
Based upon feedback received, virtually everyone who attended my talks in South Africa, and in the U.S., left with serious doubts about the official version of 9/11.
One Supreme Court (not U.S.) judge said that at the very least my presentation provides "reasonable doubt" if not "a preponderance of evidence" against the official account of 9/11.
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
Arlington, VA
I recently returned from a 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour of South Africa where I gave about two talks daily to audiences of several hundred, appeared on several radio stations including SABC, and one interview was broadcast to Sub-Saharan Africa — view at http://www.twf.org/News/News911.html.
Based upon feedback received, virtually everyone who attended my talks in South Africa, and in the U.S., left with serious doubts about the official version of 9/11.
One Supreme Court (not U.S.) judge said that at the very least my presentation provides "reasonable doubt" if not "a preponderance of evidence" against the official account of 9/11.
Enver Masud
Founder, The Wisdom Fund
Arlington, VA
Saturday, June 21, 2008
Japanese lawmaker questions official explanation
Yukihisa Fujita, a member of the Democratic Party of Japan, asked the Japanese Parliament and Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda to explain gaping holes in the official 9/11 story that various groups — including those who call themselves the "911 Truth Movement" — claim to have exposed.
Fujita, along with a growing number of individuals — including European and American politicians — are leading a charge to conduct a thorough, independent investigation of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001.
Fujita, along with a growing number of individuals — including European and American politicians — are leading a charge to conduct a thorough, independent investigation of what happened on Sept. 11, 2001.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Tim Russert, Dick Cheney, and 9/11
If the story that Cheney told Russert at Camp David, just five days after 9/11, was true, then the story told by the 9/11 Commission in July 2004, almost three years later, was false.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Monday, June 09, 2008
New 9-11 feature-length movie too truthful to show
On 9-11, filmmaker Paul Cross was doing post-production work in Washington DC when he heard about the "terrorist" attack on the Pentagon. Hours later he visited the Pentagon and saw that the official story was a lie.
"There was no passenger jet wreckage, no lawn scorching, no damage to lamp posts and fences, and no construction materials in the path of the alleged jet," Cross told me. "I immediately realized it was a hoax, and that so-called attack on the World Trade Center was also a hoax."
Cross says he was in mourning for weeks. "Literally in tears for what has become of this country."
He decided to make the feature film Severe Visibility to alert his fellow citizens.
"There was no passenger jet wreckage, no lawn scorching, no damage to lamp posts and fences, and no construction materials in the path of the alleged jet," Cross told me. "I immediately realized it was a hoax, and that so-called attack on the World Trade Center was also a hoax."
Cross says he was in mourning for weeks. "Literally in tears for what has become of this country."
He decided to make the feature film Severe Visibility to alert his fellow citizens.
Saturday, June 07, 2008
Why were the tapes destroyed? Did they reveal the absence of confessions?
In their book, Kean and Hamilton wrote that they were unable to obtain “access to star witnesses in custody who were the only possible source for inside information about the 9/11 plot.”
The only information the commission was permitted to have about what was learned from interrogations of alleged plot ringleaders, such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, came from “thirdhand” sources. The commission was not permitted to question the alleged plotters in custody or even to meet with those who interrogated the alleged plotters. Consequently, write Kean and Hamilton, “We had no way of evaluating the credibility of detainee information” that was fed to them by third party hands. “How could we tell if someone such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was telling us the truth?”
The fact that video tapes of the interrogations existed was kept secret from the 9/11 Commission.
The only information the commission was permitted to have about what was learned from interrogations of alleged plot ringleaders, such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, came from “thirdhand” sources. The commission was not permitted to question the alleged plotters in custody or even to meet with those who interrogated the alleged plotters. Consequently, write Kean and Hamilton, “We had no way of evaluating the credibility of detainee information” that was fed to them by third party hands. “How could we tell if someone such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was telling us the truth?”
The fact that video tapes of the interrogations existed was kept secret from the 9/11 Commission.
Criticism rages with accused 9/11 conspirators in court
"It was not justice, it was ridiculous," the military attorney for Mustafa al-Hawsawi, Major Jon Jackson, said Thursday after a hearing in the ultramodern new court building set up at the US naval base on Cuba's southeastern tip.
. . . the accused refused their lawyers' assistance, and some asked to be executed so they could be martyrs. . . .
Chief military defense attorney Colonel Steven David slammed what he said was the judge's rush to hold the hearing without giving the lawyers time to win their clients' trust.
. . . the accused refused their lawyers' assistance, and some asked to be executed so they could be martyrs. . . .
Chief military defense attorney Colonel Steven David slammed what he said was the judge's rush to hold the hearing without giving the lawyers time to win their clients' trust.
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
9/11 families: Gitmo tribunals 'tainted'
In advance of Thursday's arraignment of alleged Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and others at Guantanamo Bay, the relatives of seven victims of the 9/11 attacks are charging that the military tribunals are "tainted by political influence."
In a June 3 letter to Susan Crawford, the judge who serves as the convening authority over the commissions, the family members claim that the latest example of the system's "politicization" was a secret invitation to attend the proceedings that allegedly was extended only to Deborah Burlingame, who lost her brother in 9/11 and has supported the Bush administration's position on the military tribunals.
In a June 3 letter to Susan Crawford, the judge who serves as the convening authority over the commissions, the family members claim that the latest example of the system's "politicization" was a secret invitation to attend the proceedings that allegedly was extended only to Deborah Burlingame, who lost her brother in 9/11 and has supported the Bush administration's position on the military tribunals.
Lawmaker asks McCain to talk with 9/11 theorists
State Sen. Karen Johnson, a Mesa Republican, delivered a letter to McCain's Senate office Tuesday asking that he sit down with Scottsdale activist Blair Gadsby and a pair of leading members of the 9/11 Truth Movement to consider alternative explanations for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and the collapse of the World Trade Center towers. Gadsby's fast outside McCain's Senate office — 241 Russell Senate Office Building — entered its 10th day today.
Monday, June 02, 2008
Pinning the blame for 9/11
We sent the following to Chris Mondics — author of "Pinning the blame for 9/11," and "How Cozen took on a kingdom for 9/11 liability," a two part article:
Cozen was able to sue the Saudis because U.S. media failed to investigate what really happened on 9/11.
Recently, I went on a 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour of South Africa during which I spoke to audiences of several hundred daily. None contested my claim that the 9/11 Commission Report is fatally flawed.
I challenge you, and the 9/11 Commission, to rebut the facts and arguments I present at http://www.twf.org/News/News911.html.
Enver Masud
The Wisdom Fund
Cozen was able to sue the Saudis because U.S. media failed to investigate what really happened on 9/11.
Recently, I went on a 3-week, 9/11 lecture tour of South Africa during which I spoke to audiences of several hundred daily. None contested my claim that the 9/11 Commission Report is fatally flawed.
I challenge you, and the 9/11 Commission, to rebut the facts and arguments I present at http://www.twf.org/News/News911.html.
Enver Masud
The Wisdom Fund
Sunday, June 01, 2008
Largest Swiss newspaper asks if Bush was behind 9/11
2,973 humans died with the attacks of 9/11. "Bin Laden" and "Al Qaeda", the Bush clan cried. The world believed themm. In the meantime even scientists doubt the Bush version. Now, Swiss university professors Albert A. Stahel and Daniele Ganser raise new questions.
"Something is not correct", says strategy expert Stahel in "World Week", and here he refers to the "incomplete" official US Government 9/11 Report of 2004.
The university professor confirms his criticism in BLICK: "Osama Bin Laden cannot be 'the large godfather' behind the attacks. He did not have enough means of communication".
"Something is not correct", says strategy expert Stahel in "World Week", and here he refers to the "incomplete" official US Government 9/11 Report of 2004.
The university professor confirms his criticism in BLICK: "Osama Bin Laden cannot be 'the large godfather' behind the attacks. He did not have enough means of communication".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
