Wednesday, April 5, 2017

Propaganda: FBI Releases Trove of 9/11 Pentagon Photos

Jim Fetzer

For reasons that are not entirely obvious (but which may be related to the presentations on 9/11 at the Nation of Islam in Detroit on Saviour's Day by Kevin Barrett, Richard Gage and Christopher Bollyn), the FBI released a set of photographs taken at the Pentagon on 9/11. Those who are looking for proof that a plane -- allegedly, American Airlines Flight 77, a Boeing 757 -- actually crashed there are going to be disappointed, because there is no proof here. For students of 9/11, this is a big "nothing burger".

The lead photograph in the New York Post (30 March 2017), featuring 9 of 21 released by the FBI, shows smoke rising from the Pentagon and flames, suggesting (to those unfamiliar with the evidence) that the plane had just hit the building. But it turns out that, upon closer inspection, we are witnessing a classic Hollywood special effect, because the flames and smoke are not coming from the Pentagon itself but from a series of enormous dumpsters in front of the building, as the following displays:

Indeed, another student of 9/11 visited me in Duluth in 2006 and showed me 44 more slides, where you could see daylight between the dumpsters and the building. Another photo in this set shows the collapsed portion of the Pentagon, which happened 27 minutes after the plane had purportedly hit the building. But notice the complete absence of any debris from the aircraft. It's not there, which is why Thierry Meyssan put together his classic "Hunt the Boeing" series, which remains well worth viewing today:

There are loads of photographs that show no indication that any plane crashed at the Pentagon, where my personal favorite is the following. The civilian lime-green fire trucks, which were in the vicinity, are already on the scene and extinguishing the very modest fires that remained. But observe the wide expanse of the Pentagon lawn, which is completely bereft of any signs of a plane having hit anywhere near the Pentagon, as Jamie McIntyre explained to his CNN anchor shortly after the purported crash:

Indeed, debris only began showing up much later, which I suspect was dropped from a circling C-130 (because it would have been too obvious to have enlisted men and officers carry debris onto the lawn. The most interesting piece, by far, was this part of the fuselage of a Boeing 757, which shows no signs of having been involved in a violent crash or having been exposed to intense fires. Entwined in the debris is an extremely interesting piece of green vine, not indigenous to the Arlington, VA, area:

There have been very few crashes of Boeing 757s during their history. Jim Hanson, a retired attorney from Columbus, OH, was able to track this one back to a crash near Cali, Colombia, in 1995, when American Airlines Flight 965 lost its way and passed through a jungle where vines of this kind are in abundance en route to crashing into the side of a mountain. You can see a photo from the crash site in this brief clip from one of my past presentations on 9/11, which, of course, exposes the fraud BIG TIME!

It would have been inadvisable to show the actual alleged hit point (shown here), which features a chain-link fence, two cars and enormous spools of cable, and unbroken windows on the building, because it does not show an enormous pile of aluminum debris from a 100-ton aircraft: no wings, no tail, no bodies, seats or luggage. Not even the engines were recovered from the science--although my impression is that, in the decade since, they have produced engines alleged to have been recovered there.

This two-hour presentation reviews the evidence that none of the four 9/11 aircraft actually crashed on 9/11. Two of them (Flight 11 and Flight 77) were not even scheduled that day and were not in the air. Pilots for 9/11 Truth have determined that Flight 93 was over Champaign-Urbana, IL, after it had purportedly crashed in Shanksville, and that Flight 175 was over Harrisberg and Pittsburgh, PA, long after it had officially hit the South Tower. It begins with Jamie McIntyre's report from the scene that there was no indication that any large plane had hit anywhere near the Pentagon, because none had.

Here's another in this newly released set, which shows the area where the building had collapsed. We have no signs of a plane having caused this collapse--indeed, there are no signs of the kind of intense fire shown in the five frames the Pentagon released, the most important of which was the first, which was conveniently labeled "plane". When I asked Jack White, a legendary photo and film analyst with whom I had collaborated in research on JFK, to size the image of a Boeing 757 to the tail of what we see in the frame. It was more than twice the size of the "plane, proving it cannot have been a Boeing 757:

While the American flag is a nice touch, the proof that none of the four 9/11 planes actually crashed is extensive and compelling. I obtained FAA Registration Records, moreover, which show that the aircraft used for Flights 93 and 175 were not de-registered (or formally taken out of service) until 28 September 2005, raising the questions, How can planes that were not even in the air have crashed on 9/11?; and, How can planes that crashed on 9/11 have still been in the air four years later? Those who would like to know more about 9/11 may want to visit and check out the following:

Jim Fetzer, a former Marine Corps officer, is McKnight Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota Duluth.