The Witnesses

 

“We must look for consistency.  Where there is want of it we must suspect deception.”

— Sherlock Holmes

 

TV audiences around the world were fed the official story.

To TV watchers, there was never any doubt about what hit the Pentagon on the morning of September 11, 2001.  From the very moment of impact, it was perfectly clear to everyone exactly what had happened.  We know this because of the accounts on the witness lists.  And everyone should believe these accounts, and not question them — because that wouldn’t be patriotic — to question the official story. 

The truth of the matter is that the “American Airlines 757 crashes into the Pentagon” story did not spontaneously arise from the eyewitness accounts of rank-and-file citizens.  To the contrary, it was a product of the work of Donald Rumsfeld, Ted Olson and unnamed Pentagon officials, and it was reinforced by the media largely through the words of the political operatives and media whores — and people like reputed Navy pilot Tim Timmerman, who spoke on the air with CNN correspondent Bob Franken on the afternoon of September 11 (only four-and-a-half hours after the incident at the Pentagon).  Timmerman was seemingly on a mission to unequivocally establish what had struck the Pentagon.

 

What was the initial speculation of what happened at the Pentagon?

Despite the fact that it was widely known that hijacked airliners were being used as weapons that day, and that a hijacked airliner allegedly was heading towards Washington D.C. — no one initially seemed to know what had happened at the Pentagon!

Initial reports flowed into the Situation Room (the crisis center during 9/11), that there was a bomb at the Pentagon, perhaps a car bomb.  While Arlington County Emergency Communications Center reported an airplane crash in the vicinity of the 14th Street Bridge.  Eyewitnesses close to the Pentagon seemed convinced that something other than an airliner hit the Pentagon.  Lon Rains “was convinced it was a missile.”[i]  Some thought it had been a small commuter jet or prop plane, and another claimed, “ It must have been a helicopter.”  In the late morning, Fox TV had reported that the Pentagon had been hit by a U.S. Air Force flight.  Some witnesses were puzzled, like Tom Hovis who remarked, “Strangely, no one at the Reagan Tower noticed the aircraft.”  While Scott P. Cook, who worked immediately opposite the Pentagon on the other side of River, commented, “I cannot fathom why neither myself nor Ray, a former Air Force officer, missed a big 757, going 400 miles an hour, as it crossed in front of our window in its last 10 seconds of flight.”  CNN claimed during live coverage that, “An eye-witness told us the plane didn’t crash into the building.”²⁵⁴

So it appears that, nearly a full hour after the attack had occurred, no one had yet begun to piece together the official story of what had happened.  Enter Donald Rumsfeld…

 

Who was the first to claim that an aircraft hit the Pentagon?

According to Assistant Secretary of Defense Victoria Clarke, it was none other then Donald Rumsfeld who first determined that an airplane had struck the Pentagon — half an hour after the attack had occurred.

 

When [Rumsfeld] came back in the building about half an hour later, he was the first one that told us he was quite sure it was a plane.  Based on the wreckage and based on the thousands and thousands of pieces of metal.  He was the one that told us, the staff that was in the room.  So he was really the first one who told us that it was most likely a plane.¹⁹⁷

[Emphasis added]

 

Amazingly, even before the attack, Rumsfeld is confident that the Pentagon will get attacked!  He said to Congressman Cox, “Believe me, this isn’t over yet.  There’s going to be another attack, and it could be us.”³⁰⁶

 

Who published the first report of an aircraft hitting the Pentagon?

The first statement toward identification, was made by the Pentagon’s website.  It announced — a commercial airliner, possibly hijacked, had hit the Pentagon.

 

Who made the first claim that it was Flight 77 that hit the Pentagon?

Theodore Olson, U.S. Solicitor General and right-wing ideologue played a key role in producing the official story.  It was Ted Olson that single-handedly verified the “hijacked by Arabs and flown back to Washington” story through his inconsistent accounts of unconfirmed cell phone calls that he supposedly received from his right-wing propagandist wife.  Thus, Olson sealed the connection between Flight 77, the hijacking, and the Pentagon.  By afternoon, it become generally accepted that the aircraft that hit the Pentagon was Flight 77.  Then the story spread quickly through the media, source — CNN.

 

Where were the regular-guy eyewitnesses?

There was allegedly hundreds of eyewitnesses present — local and national media figures, prominent politicians, police and fire personnel, and military and intelligence personnel — but where were the tourists, construction workers, secretaries, bus drivers, etc?  One of the few, if not only tourist, was Judy Rice, her story appeared in an article by the Nation:

 

Judy Rice, a tourist from Clearfield, Utah, visiting Washington with her 13-year-old daughter, Arianna, was trembling and on the verge of tears as she stood not far from the Pentagon.  “I just don’t know where to go, “she said.  “I fear for my daughter.  She’s my youngest.  All I want is to get away from the monuments.” [ii]

 

She seems to be a credible witness, fearful and confused — she mentions nothing of an aircraft.  In another report, Kim Dent, administrative assistant, who works across the street from the Pentagon, said she and some co-workers were looking out the window of their office building.  “We saw the shadow of a plane.  We heard the engine.  We all said, ‘That plane is flying kind of close.’”²⁵⁸ Again she mentions nothing of an aircraft, let alone a crash — she was right across the street and only saw a shadow, which would imply that it was high enough that she didn’t see it.

 

Why is there so much controversy about what hit the Pentagon?

When one compares the World Trade Center (WTC) aircraft strikes to the Pentagon attack, there are more than a few major differences in witness accounts.  At the WTC there were a few disputes, mostly over the identity of the aircraft that hit it or on details like whether there was a pod or not — we also had photos and video evidence.  After a brief moment of confusion following the first attack — we knew what had happened.  However, with the Pentagon there was a completely different story — widely conflicting witness reports and no undisputed physical evidence.  And to make matters worst, there was no video or photographic evidence of the crash.

 

Why are there so many differing accounts of what happened?

What could explain the wide array of perceptions surrounding what would seem like an “open and shut” case.  If a Boeing 757, as big as it was, had hit the Pentagon in front of numerous witnesses — Why did it take an hour or so to sort out what had happened?  Why did it take Donald Rumsfeld, who wasn’t even there, to make the first definitive assurtion that a commercial airliner had hit the Pentagon?  Could a skeptical explanation be that there wasn’t one? 

 

Interestingly, it seems witness reports can be grouped into a few clusters of differing versions.

The reports appear clustered into four groups:

• An airliner hit the Pentagon, identified as a 757 (this is the official government version).
• An airliner was seen approaching, but not explicitly seen striking the Pentagon.  It was not identified either.
• No aircraft hit the Pentagon.
• Other aircrafts types hit the Pentagon (helicopter, small plane, or missile).

Interestingly, it is the people that were identified of possibly having an agenda, who were most adamant in claiming that it was an American Airlines 757 that hit the Pentagon.  Virtually all those that eluded to something else other than an airliner hitting the Pentagon, or that refuted an airliner was involved — are persons not associated with the Department of Defense (DoD).  Those that claim to have seen an airliner approaching, but could not say that it had hit the Pentagon for certain, comprising perhaps the largest group of eyewitnesses, DoD related or not.

 

Does a Boeing 757 look so unusual that it could be so easily discernible from other jet types — at 500 mph?

The 757 looks like a typical airliner, it can easily be misidentified as any twin-engine commercial commuter aircraft.  The family of Boeing twin-engine jets include; the popular 737, 757, and the 767 models.  Also within each model there are sub models like the 757-223, 757-300, 767-300, etc., this further complicates identification.  In addition, American Airlines flies several Airbus A300s — these have an amazingly similar appearance to the Boeing 757 aircraft.  Only an astute trained eye could be able to convincingly identify those aircraft from one another — having the aircraft streaking by you at 500 mph for a brief second or two, is another matter.

 

How easy was it to become a Pentagon witness?

Actually, it was (and still is), very easy to become a witness.  Most of the reports were never substantiated, sourced correctly, nor were witnesses completely disclosed.  The media was all too eager in the 9/11feeding frenzy — featuring any witness report that supported their official story.  On the other hand, those that differed from the touted story — like Willie Rodriguez (whom defiantly claimed there were explosions in the basement of the WTC), were black balled.  Many witness statements wound up solely on the Internet, covering a wide variety of sites — computer sites, 9/11 memorial sites, or 9/11 research sites.  Even it you missed the first round, you could post yourself years later, on a message board, or find a rinky-dink newspaper that would print an unsubstantiated claim.

Here are some examples:

1. Nitelite (in the form of a poem, sent via e-mail)
2. MJ (google news)
3. Steven G. (yahoo groups)
4. Gus (Cox News Service)

These reports unfortunately have been “picked up” and posted throughout the Internet, being treated as credible witnesses.  

 

Should you take the witness reports at face value?

You should take nothing at face value.  Would you believe everything that a used car salesman tells you?  Of course not!  And what about the mainstream media?  Do you believe everything the media agents tell you?  Today the media establishment is controlled by an ever increasingly powerful group of Jewish-Americans.  They are pursuing their own agenda of pro-Israeli policies — one is the destruction of their enemies — Muslims are at the top of their list.  If someone has an agenda, you can rest assured that it will be part of their lexis, whether it’s readily apparent or cleverly hidden. 

A witness report can be misrepresented in many ways:

• Fabrication of a story, either by the witness or by the media.
• Embellishment of the story, adding details or other items to advance an agenda, this again could be done by the witness or by the media agent.  This may occur repeatedly.
• Misrepresentation of facts.  This could be removal of important information or altering it to further one’s scheme.
• Editor insertions can lead a reader or listener, towards a conclusion, that might not otherwise have been apparent based on the raw reported facts.

 

Was there media embellishment?

A popular tool in promoting the official story was the heavy use of embellishments by the media establishments to alter one’s perception of what had truly happened.  Here are some examples:

 

Aydan Kizldrgli, a student from Turkey, was driving by the Pentagon when the plane hit, about 9:35 a.m. ET.  “I was in the car, and there was a big boom”²⁵⁸

 

The editor had added, “…was driving by the Pentagon when the plane hit…”  Doesn’t that change how someone derives his or her own conclusions about an incident?  The Washington Post, in reporting Lt. Col. Art Haubold’s story stated:

 

…[He] was in his office on the opposite side of the complex when the plane struck.  “We were sitting there watching the reports on the World Trade Center.  All of a sudden, the windows blew in,” he said.  “We could see a fireball out our window.²⁹⁷

 

Again, an editor had added, “…when the plane struck.”  Art Haubold was on the other side of the complex, so it was impossible that he saw or knew that a plane had hit the Pentagon.  That phrase was added so that you would know it was a plane, whether Art Haubold saw it or not, that wasn’t important to the newspaper editor.  This is one of the most common tactics used by the media — they merely inject a leader sentence or phrase, which essentially tells the reader what they want you to believe.  If you read a newspaper you will see this occur several times, even in the same article.  This tactic substitutes the media’s role in providing unbiased information into a subtle form of directed mind control.  It’s an insidious form of propaganda.

 

Was there media fabrication?

During 9/11 and its aftermath there are countless occurrences of massive media misinformation — unfortunately these fables become unjustly etched into our history books.  Gerard Holmgren, a 9/11 researcher, had uncovered this outstanding example of media disinformation — literally in the process of transformation. 

The following is the original transcript of Victoria Clarke’s media briefing at the Pentagon — Federal news Service Sept 11 2001:
 

And I’d just like to say one more thing.  The response from the military has been phenomenal.  The response from the search and rescue people has been incredible, and the people in the community.  And I’ll just give you one example.  There is a young man, Captain Lincoln Liebner.
Q: Spell it.
MS. CLARKE: — L-i-e-b-n-e-r — who was on the west side of the building when it was hit.  He saw what happened.  He immediately went in to try to help some of the injured, and helped pull them out.  His hands were burned.  He went to the hospital to be taken care of.  They forced him to go to the hospital.  He came back and he’s in the building and he is working.  And that’s just one — [iii]
 

To follow how disinformation is created we can walk along with a media instrument to see what happens…

Here’s the first report on 9/11 by Agence France:
 

At a media briefing, Pentagon spokeswoman Torie Clark told the story of Capt. Lincoln Liebner, who was outside the Pentagon when the blast took place.  He rushed into the building to help.  His hands were burned, and after he was taken away to a hospital for treatment, he returned later in the day to do more.[iv]
 

No quote from Leibner, and not even a second hand reference to any kind of plane, let alone an “American airlines passenger jet.”  In fact the incident is described as a “blast”.

Here’s the second report on 9/11 by Agence France:

 
“Army Captain Lincoln Liebner, who witnessed the blast, entered the damaged building and pulled colleagues from the fire, according to Pentagon spokeswoman Victoria Clarke.  His hands badly burnt by the flames, Liebner refused to leave the scene and seek treatment.”
“They forced him to go to the hospital,” Clarke said.  “He came back and he’s in the building and he is working.”²⁶⁰
 

The third report on 9/11 by Agence France:

 
Pentagon spokeswoman Torie Clark related the example of Army Capt. Lincoln Liebner who saw the aircraft hit and rushed into the burning building to help.  He later was taken to a nearby hospital to have his hands treated for burns, but then returned to the Pentagon, Clark said.²⁶⁰
 

In this report there is no direct quote from Liebner but what he’s alleged to have witnessed has suddenly changed from a “blast” to he “saw the aircraft hit.”

And in the fourth report on 9/11 by Agence France:

 

“I saw this large American Airlines passenger jet coming in fast and low.” said Army captain Lincoln Liebner.  “My first thought was, I’ve never seen one flying at that height”, he said.  “Before it hit, I realized what was happening.”²⁶⁰

 

This becomes the direct quote from Leibner, and remains so for the other 10 reports by Agence France that day.  While, the reference to Clarke had disappeared.  Notice that now the media had established that a large American Airlines passenger jet was what hit the Pentagon, despite no evidence of this from the original source.  This report would be disseminated to readers and viewers around the world, and likewise, picked up and propagated by other news agencies.  This is an example of fabrication.  There are many examples similar to this.  This media disinformation is truly shameful.

 

Do Washington officials set agendas for the media establishment?

Bill Moyers, at the National Conference Media Reform, illustrated why beltway media establishments don’t report on certain issues, or when they do — it is as the government stated what “happened”.  He claims that the system has disintegrated into a process of “recounting what officials say and not scrutinizing their statements…”  He cited a media spokesperson, claiming that if, “It was not an official story sanctioned by an official [government] source, …” it wasn’t reported on, therefore never disseminated to the public.  Moyers stated, “News has become hidden” in the propaganda and spin and that this current system “wasn’t healthy for democracy.”  He insisted on the importance of journalists in needing to report the,” little fibs and fantasies as well as the big lie of people in power.”  Unfortunately this wasn’t happening on 9/11.[v] 

On the BBC television show, “Newsnight”, an American journalist confessed that since the 9/11 attacks, US reporters are simply too afraid to ask the uncomfortable questions [of the government] that could kill careers.[vi] But on the other side of the coin, others readily support the right-wing White House politics, like FOX News’s Neil Cavuto, who proudly insisted: “Am I slanted and biased?  You damn well bet I am!”

 

Why were witnesses given debriefings?

Ramos, who was a Pentagon Rescue worker, claimed that, “We went to several debriefings.”  Don Perkal, who had escaped from the Pentagon after the attack, reported seeing “hundreds of FBI, Secret Service and Defense Department plainclothes investigators were deployed in the parking lot, recording witness statements.”[vii]  Government debriefings may have been utilized to change eyewitnesses reports or their perception of what they had seen.

 

Were “talking-points” employed?

Similar phrases used over and over, may suggest that during the government debriefings — couching, or talking points were used.  Notice how many witness reports state almost to the word these remarks:

• It made a sharp downward angle.
• It was really low, clipped lampposts.
• It was an American Airlines 757  (not 737, not 767, only a 757.
• It was at full-throttle or the engines roared or screamed.
• I could see the faces in the windows.
• There was a massive (or gaping) hole.
• The flaps and landing gear was up.
• It tilted just as it hit, or the wing scraped the grass.
• There was debris was all over.

 

The claims of seeing, “horrific faces in the windows”, is ludicrous.  Seeing inside the tiny dark airline windows even while the plane is grounded is rather difficult.  Consider how hard it would be to follow and maintain contact something moving at 500 mph!  Was this embellishment meant to give a more personal touch? 

The witnesses, that claimed that it had “flaps up”, “faces in the windows”, or that it, unequivocally was a 757, gives immense skepticism to their accounts.  Is seems that the purpose of this “talking-point” of the constant referrals to flaps and landing gear, was to dispel the theory, that they had mistaken Flight 77 for one that was making a routine landing at Reagan National Airport.

Many stories incorporated phases like “the wing scraped the grass” and “debris was all over”.  But on careful inspection of the lawn photos, there is absolutely no debris, nor even an out of place divot on that golf-course quality grass.  In the Pentagon photos — can you see the massive hole?  …didn’t think so (that came later).

Many talking-point witnesses used speed qualifiers like: “just before it hit, it accelerated”, “full-throttle”, “the engines roared”.  Again a possible reason for this, like the flaps and landing gear item, it was to dispel the notion that the aircraft was going for a landing at Reagan National.  An aircraft before it performs a landing slows down a lot, but with flaps up, they still may have to rev up the engines to gain more speed — this can be quite loud. 

The Doppler effect must have been startling, with the plane traveling 500mph.  If you can imagine an ambulance speeding by you at 70 mph, then multiple that effect by seven.  What’s more, because of the aircrafts great speed, you probably would not even have heard the aircraft until after it had already passed you by.  William Lagasse, an eyewitness and pilot noted, “because of the Doppler effect no one could have heard the plane if they were on Route 27 until it was already in the building, identifying its position and trajectory from that angle would have been difficult if not impossible...”[viii]

And something else to ponder over: The maximum speed of a Boeing 757 at sea level is roughly 450 mph due to more dense air.  But, air traffic controllers at Dulles airport claimed it had, “speed of about 500 miles an hour”.  If people heard it accelerating — how can the 757 accelerate additionally, if it was already exceeding it’s maximum speed?

There is a problem of contradictory trajectories that arises in several eyewitness reports; such as, “it had a steep downward angle”, and, “It flew really low — clipping the lamppost horizontally then striking the side of the Pentagon at just above the grass”.  The “stories” that claim both “a steep dive” and “clipping lampposts” is contrary and should raise your ears.

Possible purposes for debriefing, couching, or talking-points was to:

• Unequivocally connect American Airlines FL 77 to the attack.
• Use excessive details, to counter “maybes” or “raising question as to what they saw”.
• Establish a credible “official story” of exactly what happened.
• Discredit what really had happened, and to disarm “conspiracy theorists” and other researchers of truth.

 

Example of talking points in action.

This is from the CNN interview with Tim Timmerman (notice the fervor that he uses in making his point known).

 

Bob Franken: What can you tell us about the plane itself?
Tim Timmerman: It was a Boeing 757, American Airlines, no question.
Franken: You say it was a Boeing, and you say it was a 757 or 767?
Timmerman: 7-5-7.
Franken: 757, which, of course …
Timmerman: American Airlines.

Franken: American Airlines...²⁷¹ [Emphasis added]

 

(We will come back to this a little later.)

 

Did anyone try to investigate or substantiate the witness’s reports?

“Families of victims and others who work at the airlines, as well as many witnesses I have spoken to, are offended and shocked by these unfounded speculations.  Those willing to do a modicum of investigative work here in DC will be quickly disabused of this disinformation.”[ix]

 — John Judge — researcher in the Washington D.C.

 

Investigate—?  Not the mainstream media — however, Gerard Holmgren, and some other 9/11 researchers did.  It wasn’t hard to find countless fallacies in most of the “DoD connected” accounts — it seems the longer the account the more it was riddled with discrepancies.  Stories evolved with media enticement, and embellishment, there were contradictory statements within the same person’s testimony.  Others, like Penny Elgas, produced “stories” that were obviously created while watching a frame-by-frame crash scene in a “Die Hard” movie; taking down notes on each evolving detail.  Her final report is a 250 plus word extravaganza done to clarify an event of a few nanoseconds in duration.  [Her account is in Appendix: Witnesses]  Some individuals were deceptive in telling her they really were, in an attempt to hide their true connections to the Bush Administration, like Rick Renzi (corrupt politician), Donald Timmerman (related to Kenneth Timmerman — Jewish war-monger), and Jeff Aulauf (owner of BP Amoco).  Some went on worldwide TV like Timmerman and gotten tangled in his web of deception.

 

How can we determine what is a credible eyewitness?

In trying to identify what makes a good eyewitness (which is a subjective process), we can attempt to establish some basic criteria for credibility.  There are some items to consider:

• Are there connections to the alleged or any other institution that could benefit from the incident?  Police investigators wouldn’t give these witnesses too much credibility.  In fact, these same witnesses maybe considered suspects in some circumstances.
• Issues of censoring in the military press – Everything goes through a clearance process in the military, especially at the Pentagon, this is done obviously in order to protect the establishment from inadvertently releasing classified information or anything else for that matter.
• Debriefings conducted at the Pentagon – Ramos, a Pentagon rescue worker stated, “…We went to several debriefings.”  Did those debriefings help influence or change any of the witness statements?
• Testimonials laced with obvious lies – “The wing plowed into the grass, then it cart wheeled into the building” or “I saw the “horror-struck faces of the passengers”.  If we find such blatant lies, then we should be particularly skeptical.
• Eyewitness reports should be submitted in a timely manner – A report submitted much later, should lead us to ask “why”?
• Eyewitness reports should be sourced and “in there own words” – There was considerable “media embellishment” done on 9/11.  Often one reporting agency paraphrased witness #1’s account only to be re paraphrased and embellished by reporting agency #2.

 

Were some witnesses prone to having an agenda?

Numerous eyewitnesses of the “official story” have political or media connections and even worse — stood to benefit in some form or another. 

 

“As for the govt. witnesses, no, I wouldn’t trust any of them any further than I could spit.  It would be very easy to get those folks to lie if you needed to.”

 — NewKid — www.ezboard.com

 

Consider the following list of VIP witnesses:

Gary Bauer – Talking head and former hard right Republican presidential candidate who has been linked to the notoriously radical Project for a New American Century (PNAC).  The group called for a “new Pearl Harbor.”

Paul Begala – Democratic Party operative and nominally liberal punching bag on CNN’s “Crossfire.”

Bobby Eberle – President and CEO of GOPUSA, a portal of right-wing propaganda.

Mike Gerson – Director of George W. Bush’s speech writing staff.

Ted Olson – Solicitor General, husband of Barbara Olson.

James Robbins – contributor to National Review, a national security analyst often seen on TV, and a Senior Fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council.

Greta Van Susteren – Legal analyst for Fox News.

 

Gary Bauer of the Project for a New American Century

 (Photo: www.evote.com).

 

Those are some of the popular figures that get in front of your TV every night and lie to you.  They believe — “the what ever it takes” policies of Washington.  They routinely manipulate facts for whatever suits their purposes, and often are accused of out-and-out lying.  However there are many more eyewitnesses whom were connected.  Even though they are lesser known to the public eye, these characters should be considered to be just as capable in advancing their agenda.  Again, by whatever means necessary, including lying. 

 

Let me briefly introduce them:

Dennis Clem – Deputy Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Mike Dobbs – Marine (Navy) Corps Policy Planner Commander and senior fellow with the Lexington Institute.

Penny Elgas – sits on the FDIC Advisory Committee on Banking Policy, alongside of Jean Baker, who just happens to be the Chief of Staff at the Office of President George H.W. Bush.

General Richard Myers – Vice-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Albert Hemphill – Lt. General with the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.

Captain (now Major) Lincoln Leibner – Communications Officer for Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.

Stephen McGraw – former U.S. Department of Justice attorney reborn as an Opus Dei priest.

Colonel Mitch Mitchell – serves as a CBS News war spinner military consultant.

Patty Murray – United States Senator (D –Washington).  She is a member of the Subcommittee on Homeland Security.  Sits on a board with George Bush, Sr.’s Chief of Staff.

Rick Renzi – (the law student) is actually the third most corrupt United States Congressman (R – Arizona).  His father owns a large defense company.

Meseidy Rodriguez – her name appears in legal records of Dick Cheney’s top-secret energy policy meetings, which isn’t a good sign.

John O’Keefe – managing editor of Influence, Lawyer lobbying magazine.

Vice Admiral Darb Ryan – Chief of U.S. Naval Personnel.

Alfred S. Regnery – President of Regnery Publishing, (publisher of Barbara Olson’s book) a portal of right-wing propaganda.  He is a practicing attorney and on the board of the American Foreign Policy Council “staffed by noted specialists in foreign and defense policy, and serves as a valuable resource to officials in the highest levels of government.” 

Mary Lyman – Executive Director of the Washington-based lobbying group — Coalition of Publicly Traded Partnerships.

Jeffrey Taylor – Chairman of the lobby practice of Barnes & Thornburg, the practice was heavily linked to Jack Abramoff, the tainted lobbyist.  Later, Taylor becomes a lobbyist for Christian Coalition of America, a right-wing Christian group.

Elizabeth Smiley – intelligence operations specialist with Civil Aviation Security at FAA headquarters – which means that she is one of the people who coincidentally failed to perform their jobs on September 11, 2001, possibly because she was busy watching staged jetliners crashing into the Pentagon.

Brig. General Clyde A. Vaughn – Deputy Director of Military Support to Civil Authorities — which means that he is another one of the people who coincidentally failed to perform their jobs on September 11, 2001, possibly because he was also busy watching staged jetliners crashing into the Pentagon.

Elaine McCusker – co-Chairman of the Coalition for National Security Research.

Fred Hey – Congressional staff attorney for corrupt congressman Bob Ney (R) of Ohio.

Frank Probst – retired Army officer and DoD contractor.

Donald Bouchoux – retired Naval Commander, Exec. Officer of VF1 “Wolfpack” F-14 squadron.  US Naval Institute and contributor of Proceedings naval periodical.

Ken Ford – State Department employee, claims he was using binoculars to watch the area.  This appears to be more consistent with a veteran Secret Service agent, Kenneth Ford.  He was later offered a position with the NSA after the 9/11.  But, he turned whistleblower and that resulted in him being framed as a spy. 

Lesley Kelly – retired Naval Commander.

Shari Taylor – finance manager at the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Philip Sheuerman – Associate General Counsel for the U.S. Air Force.

Charles H. Krohn – Army’s deputy chief of public affairs.

Ron Turner – Navy’s deputy chief information officer.

Terry Morin – former USMC aviator, Program Manager for SPARTA, Inc.

Donald (Tim) Timmerman – relative of neocon Kenneth Timmerman.  Kenneth Timmerman is a member of the fear-mongering Committee on the Present Danger and a contributor to National Review and its ultra-right counterpart FrontPagemag.com.  Currently, Kenneth Timmerman is calling for war with Iran.

 

These are the people you need to believe if you want to tout the government’s official “story”.

 

Just because someone has an agenda — does that make them a liar?

No, for example, Greta Van Susteren, of CNN (at that time), stated “We saw a plane near the Pentagon and then heard this ‘boom’.”  Many non-DoD witnesses made similar statements. 

 

How is it possible that so many witnesses were reporters for the same Gannett Company?

USA Today is part of the Gannett family of news outlets.  Gannett also publishes Air Force Times, Army Times, Marine Corp Times, Armed Forces Journal, Military Market, Military City, Defense News, The Daily Times, The Daily Record, dozens of local newspapers, (20) TV stations including WUSA in D.C.  They are the second largest media publisher in the UK as well. 

A CIA operative divulged to Philip Graham — the alleged suicided-editor of the Washington Post — ”You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month.”

 

And this is a list of media trolls that have been spouting the “talking-points” story:

Bob Dubill – executive editor for USA Today.

Mary Ann Owens – journalist for Gannett.

Richard Benedetto – reporter for USA Today.

Christopher Munsey – reporter for Navy Times.

Vin Narayanan – reporter for USA Today.

Joel Sucherman – multimedia editor for USA Today.

Mike Walter – reporter for USA Today.

Steve Anderson – director of communications for USA Today.

Fred Gaskins – national editor for USA Today.

Mark Faram – reporter for Navy Times.

Phillip Thompson – reporter for Marine Corp Times.

Anna Adams – reporter for Daily Record.

Eugenio Hernandez – TV producer/video journalist for Associated Press.

Dave Winslow – radio reporter for Associated Press.

 

Could there be a simple explanation for this aberration?  Was there a Gannett building located close by to provide a view of the attack?  Was there a Gannett sponsored bus for a journalist field trip?  Or was there a Gannett annual company picnic on the Pentagon lawn?  The answer to the above questions is of course, “no”.  They maintain that they just happened to be in the area (in various strategic locations) near the Pentagon.

 

Did Gannett have an agenda?

Gannett can be summed up as the worst of corporations.  They control the media, with propaganda that furthers their agenda, in interests of anything other than giving people a “good solid news story”.  Gannett has direct connections to Associated Press, Lockheed Martin (defense), airline industry (Continental), and numerous financial funds, Goldman Sacks, Charles Schwab, Accenture (previously Arthur Anderson), and Citigroup (Director Marjorie Magner was CEO; Citigroup is a Rockefeller company).[x]  Did any of those funds make money (short-selling) on the deaths of innocent Americans?

 

• Douglas H. McCorkindale – Chairman of Gannett.  He is also the Director of Associated Press, Continental Airlines, Inc., and Lockheed Martin Corporation.²⁶⁶

 

Does it matter that the top director of Gannett had direct connections to one of the largest defense contractors — which profited lavishly from the “War on Terror”.  Profits flourished as there own newspapers, radio, and TV, relentlessly ramming propaganda upon Americans.

 

Why were certain witnesses elusive in disclosing who they really were?

Would it matter, if we knew that Jeff Anlauf is the owner of BP Amoco?  BP Amoco is the largest non-state owned oil company, producing twice the oil or natural gas as their closest rival Exxon Mobil.  He is one of the richest men in the world and tries to be very secret about who he is (also, he’s the Director of the Minnesota Petroleum Marketers Association).  By any chance, was he in Washington D.C. for the notorious and super-secret Energy Task Force, hosted by “top-suspect” Dick Cheney.  From the Sheraton Hotel (1.6 miles from explosion), The Associated Press reported:

 
 …Suddenly I saw this plane right outside my window.  You felt like you could touch it; it was that close.  It was just incredible.  Then it shot straight across from where we are and flew right into the Pentagon.  It was just this huge fireball that crashed into the wall (of the Pentagon).[xi]           

 

Interestingly, Jeff Anlauf responded to allegations of price gouging in the Burnett County Sentinel, by his BP Amoco (during a period of record oil-industry profits), in the local region where he lived — Colfax, WI “[I’m] not earning any more money because of the high gas prices.”  The article mentioned that, “Sen. Herb Kohl and state Attorney General Peg Lautenschlager were looking for an investigation of possible price gouging by BP Amoco.”  Would you trust anything these people say?  I didn’t think so. 

 

Who is Mike Dobbs?

Mike Dobbs, Marine (Navy) Policy Planner Commander, was looking out a window from Pentagon’s outer ring, “…he saw an American Airlines 737 twin-engine airliner strike the building.”[xii]  Cmdr. Mike Dobbs is one of the “brainchild’s” of Homeland Security long before 9/11.  This excerpt from New Challenges for an Old Responsibility, Journal of Homeland Security March 2001 (now deleted from archives):

 

Although predictions that Americans will die on American soil in large numbers may eventually, and hopefully, prove to be hyperbole, they should be addressed.  The purpose of this paper is to propose a definition of homeland security, challenge some assertions regarding defense of the homeland, discuss the role of the Department of Defense (DoD) in this mission area, outline a strategic framework for homeland security, and propose a near term “way ahead” to improve homeland security.[xiii]  [Emphasis added]

 

Mike Dobbs, Marine Corps Policy Planner Commander, and senior fellow with the Lexington Institute, was one of the designers of Homeland Security, long before it’s inception in 2002.  He advocated the use of extensive military elements within the Homeland Security agency.  He also makes reference to large numbers of Americans dying on American soil.  Cmdr. Mike Dobbs was promoted to Homeland Security Commander of Joint Forces (a step towards the militarization of Homeland Security).  He advocated that the Joint Forces Command shoulder the load, in view of its previous expertise and control of home forces.[xiv]

 

Who is Donald “Tim” Timmerman?

From CNN news, September 11, …Tim Timmerman was watching from Arlington, Virginia…

 

I saw a Bowing 757 coming down 395 right over the Columbian Pike.  As it went by the Sheraton Hotel the pilot added power.  I saw it hit right in front... it didn’t appear to have crashed into the building.  Most of the energy was dissipated in hitting the ground.  But I saw the nose break up.  I saw the wings fly forward and everything was engulfed in flames.

CNN: Are you sure it wasn’t a 767?

No!  757, no question.  American Airlines.  I saw the plane disintegrate and just blow up in a big ball of fire.  The building didn’t look very damaged initially.  But I do see now looking out my window there’s quite a chunk in it.  I think the blessing here might have been that the airplane did... before it hit the building... hit the ground.  A lot of energy might have gone that way.[xv] [Emphasis added]

 

As everyone knows, there was never a big chuck of aircraft debris, nor did an aircraft bounce off the lawn as he stated.  These were lies!  Later he would back pedal…

During, the Frankin-Timmerman interview on CNN, Timmerman had originally claimed of having, a 16th floor panorama view overlooking the Pentagon that was only ¼ mile away.  But after Frankin threw Timmerman a few softball questions, Timmerman retracted some of his account claiming, “That might have happened behind the apartments that occluded my view.”  And when Frankin questioned him about other particulars surrounding the event, Timmerman became evasive, “No sir.  I’m up and about a quarter-mile away — maybe a little closer than that — and I didn’t see anything like that.”  If Timmerman lived within quarter-mile, that’s really close!  However when it came time for the details identifying the aircraft as being an American Airlines 757 — he didn’t have any problems. 

Again, this is the “talking-point” exchange where the zealous Timmerman makes his unequivocal connection to AA 77:

 

Franken: What can you tell us about the plane itself?
Timmerman: It was a Boeing 757, American Airlines, no question.
Franken: You say that it was a Boeing, and you say it was a 757 or 767?

Timmerman: 7-5-7.
Franken: 757, which, of course...
Timmerman: American Airlines.
Franken: American Airlines, one of the new generation of jets.²⁷¹  [Emphasis added]
 

Wasn’t this the real objective of the interview — for Timmerman, Franken, or both?  The interview on CNN with Tim Timmerman was never shown again…  There was no need — truthful or not, the misinformation had been planted.

Donald (Tim) Timmerman PHCS, is a retired, navy photographer and is from Virginia Beach, not Pentagon City.  He is chairman of National Association of Naval Photographers.  He lives on Einstein Drive not Epperman Drive.  The 16^th floor apartment on Eppington Drive in Pentagon City was fictitious.  No such address or apartment ever existed.  Not only that, but there are no apartments with a 16^th floor view in the distance to the Pentagon that he described — Period.  Is he related to Virginia Beach’s Kenneth Timmerman?

Kenneth Timmerman is a neocon extraordinaire, member of the fear-mongering project that calls itself the Committee on the Present Danger.  He is a contributor to the neocon National Review and its ultra-right counterpart FrontPagemag.com.  Timmerman, a Jew, has been on a crusade against Islam, currently he is calling for an invasion of Iran.  A writer remarked of his book, “Timmerman makes clear that the U.S. is facing the specter of Iran, the oldest and most active state sponsor of terror, armed now with nuclear weapons [which is a bold face lie].” 

 

Who is Rick Renzi – “law student”?

“And I want to thank my friend Rick Renzi for the tremendous work he does every day on behalf of his district, on behalf of his state, and on behalf of the nation.  In just one term in the House, Rick has shown himself to be a skilled legislator and a superb representative for the people of Arizona.”  [Clap, clap, clap]

— Vice President Dick Cheney

 

Vice President Dick Cheney personally campaigned for Rick Renzi

(Photo: rickrenzi.com).

 

“In just one term in the House, Rick has shown himself” as one of the most corrupt politicians.

Another eyewitnesses labeled a “law student”, is in fact Rick Renzi.  Yes, Republican Congressman, known for corruption and being a hardcore “Bushite”.  He currently is serving a second-term as a Republican member of Congress, representing the 1st district of Arizona (R-AZ).  At the time of 9/11, Mr. Renzi, was working for a Republican congressman as well as preparing for his run for the Congressional office.  His witness account went as follows:

 

“The plane came in at an incredibly steep angle with incredibly high speed...” was driving by the Pentagon at the time of the crash about 9:40 a.m. “The impact created a huge yellow and orange fireball,” he added.  Renzi, who was interviewed at the scene by FBI agents, said he stopped his car to watch and saw another plane following and turn off after the first craft’s impact.[xvi]

 

However, about a month after 9/11, He claimed he was on an overpass that overlooked the Pentagon and recalled, “The jet creamed in at a dive bombing angle”.

 Prior to becoming a Congressman, Rick Renzi was a successful businessman in Arizona.  He is the son of U.S. Army Major General Gene Renzi, (Ret).  After, creating numerous successful Arizona businesses, he realized his passion for public service and decided to prepare himself to serve our country as an elected official.  So, Rick enrolled in law school at the age of 39 to study public policy and the process of federal legislation.  He attended the Columbus School of Law in Washington, D.C., (graduated in 2002) while he worked for members of Arizona’s congressional delegation.

Political “watchdog” groups claim he ranks as one of the most corrupt congressmen.  In 2004, the Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) concluded an audit of Rep. Renzi’s campaign committee, Rick Renzi for Congress (“RRFC”), and found that the committee had illegally financed much of the Congressman’s 2002 election campaign.  The FEC found that, based on the documentation submitted by RRFC, $369,090 of the loans were made using impermissible corporate funds.[xvii]

In 2003, Rep. Renzi sponsored legislation (signed into law in November 2003) that dealt hundreds of millions of dollars to his father’s business while, according to environmentalists, devastating the San Pedro River.²⁷³

Renzi has called for deployment of military technology all along the nearly 2000 mile southern border of Arizona … The total cost for monitoring the whole border: $500 million.

Also, he has been a recipient of political contributions from Abramoff, and the tribes that hired him.  All within one term — Wow!

 

Now you know the TRUTH about “law student” Rick Renzi.

 

Who was Frank Probst?

Frank Probst, one of the official stories best witnesses, he was supposedly just feet from the plane:

 

I saw this plane coming right at me at what seemed like 300 miles an hour. I dove towards the ground and watched this great big engine from this beautiful airplane just vaporize.  It looked like a huge fireball; pieces were flying out everywhere … the plane seemed to be accelerating directly toward him… He recalls the engine passing on one side of him, about six feet away.  The plane’s right wing went through a generator trailer “like butter,” Probst said.  The starboard engine hit a low cement wall and blew apart.  He still can’t remember the sound of the explosion. …he said of the noiseless images he carries inside him, of the jet vanishing in a cloud of smoke and dust, and bits of metal and concrete drifting down like confetti.  On either side of him, three streetlights had been sheared in half by the airliner’s wings at 12 to 15 feet above the ground.  An engine had clipped the antenna off a Jeep Grand Cherokee stalled in traffic not far away.[xviii]  [Emphasis added]

 

Frank Probst, Pentagon renovation worker, and retired Army officer.  The Frank Probst report is just so preposterous, it seems everything he says was exactly what the government wanted to hear, which makes one suspicious that he was coached and given talking points.  However, he completely discredits himself with impossible claims that are rather immature and show that he has no scientific background or common sense.  The closest person to the crash, but he didn’t feel or hear it[!!!], or let alone be killed from the explosion or shockwave.  Wouldn’t he have suffered massive injuries?  How is it that the “tremendous explosion” everyone heard, was “noiseless” to Frank Probst?  And, clipping an antenna off a Jeep Grand Cherokee?  Frank Probst is a liar, plain and simple.  Was he active agent in the plot?  What about his military background, and what was his current connection to the DoD?

 

Some witnesses claimed they were just under the airliner, was that possible?

If a planes wing actually clipped a car antenna, the car would have flipped it over.  Unsure?  Download this video which is a “staged demonstration” showing an automobile being blown about like a tumbleweed by the blast of an aircraft’s engine exhaust (www.metacafe.com/watch/ 47116/747 _jet_blast/).  This text was from the BBC show Top Gear that aired July 2004:  

 

A tiny car was lifted up and thrown along a runway at Glasgow Prestwick yesterday after being caught by the full blast from one of the Boeing 747’s jet engines…  In the unusual stunt, the green Citroen 2CV was effortlessly lifted by the blast from the jumbo jet’s engines, traveling more than 325 yards and overturning before crashing down again at the side of the runway.[xix]

 

A car is being blown away — literally (Photo: BBC).

 

Another Internet video is available on a NASA site (asrs.arc.nasa.gov/ directline_issues/dl6_blast.htm).  This is an excerpt of their report explaining the force produced by the jet engines:

 

Before a crew can say “powerback,” jet engine blast can up-root trees, flatten building structures, shatter windows, lift and propel heavy objects, weathercock braked airplanes, blow over lift trucks, shift unbraked baggage carts, and create other havoc on airport ramps, taxiways, and runways. … Jet blast can also injure or kill crew and passengers who happen to cross its path.[xx] 

 

Yet we are expected to believe that the 757 flew over a highway overpass at about 10 feet altitude, clipping antennas with its engines, flying near billboard-type highway signs, and passing within 6 feet of Frank Probst!  All without catching anything in the blast of its turbine exhausts…

What about the shockwave?  Sgt. Noel Sepulveda who claimed he was in the parking lot, felt the shockwave from the explosion, “…the blast of the impact was so tremendous, that from his vantage point, it threw him backward over 100 feet slamming into a light pole causing him internal injuries” That gentleman was considerably further away than Mr. Bell or Frank Probst.

 

Did defense contractors have something to gain by promoting the government’s official story?

Just after the attacks of 9/11, Mr. Lee Evey, the Pentagon’s renovation manager, at a DoD news briefing announced an initial $145 million construction contract to start repairs to the damaged portion of the Pentagon.  The Annual Status Report to Congress announced on 1 March 2002 that, “The 1,000,000-square-foot wedge was five days away from completion when it was struck by hijacked American Airlines Flight 77.”  Renovation contractors had been awarded lucrative contracts the first time around, and now they would be awarded even more the second time around.

The Department of Defense announced on Sept. 15, 2001, that a contract had been awarded to Hensel Phelps Construction Co. to initiate immediate action to rebuild portions of the Pentagon damaged in the attack and to continue other renovation activities at the Pentagon.  The initial contract was $145 million, but the project has a potential value of up to $758 million total for renovation of the undamaged portions of the Pentagon.  Hensel Phelps would be the main contractor, but subcontractors such as Singleton Electric and John Kirlin would profit lavishly from the respective outsourcing of contracts.  It is believed that Hensel Phelps received a no-bid contract, because of its ties to the Army Corps of Engineers, which has hired the company for $1 billion in projects all over the world.  Hensel Phelps is known to be associated with numerous government scams such as the Denver Airport debacle.

Wayne T. Day, President of Kirlin stated,, “We had one guy who was standing, looking out the window and saw the plane when it was coming in.  He was in front of one of the blast-resistant windows.”[xxi]

Interestingly, Wayne T. Day’s Kirlin Inc. was awarded a delivery order amount of $300,000 as part of a $75 million firm-fixed-price contract for renovation, repair and minor construction for DoD Army medical and support facilities.[xxii]

Steve Snaman, manager of the datacom division for Walker Seals, “Watched from Fort McNair (across the river) as the jetliner came in low at full throttle, banked left and smashed into the wall of the Pentagon.”[xxiii]

Walker Seals has several government contracts (voice/data/video (VDV) at the Pentagon.  This particular crew was working for Lockheed Martin on installing and maintaining access control systems.  All Walker Seals workers were immediately accounted for after the attack.

Mickey Bell, of Singleton Electric, was near a trailer in construction zone, he said, “The jet came in from the south and banked left as it entered the building, narrowly missing the Singleton Electric trailer and the on-site foreman, Mickey Bell…”[xxiv] Shortly after 9/11, when renovation/repairs were announced, Singleton Electric Co. & John Kirlin were both included in the massive project.[xxv]  Also:

 

Singleton Electric Co. of Gaithersburg, MD won a $5 million contract from the Department of the Army, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for an electrical switch station.[xxvi]

 

Thus, Singleton Electric Co. & John Kirlin were insured profits for potentially years to follow.

Zinovy Pak, Russian Munitions Agency director was on his way to the Pentagon for negotiations over U.S. funding for a southern Urals chemical weapons destruction facility, when he “saw a plane crash into the building.”[xxvii]  This person needs commerce from the Pentagon.  Could his testimony be biases?  It is also third party reporting and not from the witness himself.

 

In all actuality, the Defense contractors had some of the most to gain from the attacks on the Pentagon.