Guest column: All-knowing mastermind of 9/11? Hard to believe

I posted the following comment on this article; people who feel strongly that a 757 didn't hit the Pentagon should really review the material at , they have a number of articles on the Pentagon, i linked one in my comment- the case is not persuasive to a great many sincere people, and may be a booby trap or intentional distraction. I support the release of ALL video and pics.

loosenuke wrote:
the official 9/11 story is BS, but the "pentagon hole" may be a red herring, it's been shown that 77 or a 757 could've caused the damage- when you look at ALL of the available photos, there's a 100 foot gash in the base, and it's possible the plane went into the building, getting shredded as it went- this is not solid evidence

The Pentagon No-757-Crash Theory: Booby Trap for 9/11 Skeptics by Jim Hoffman

Also, "victims" lists are not passenger lists:

Passenger Lists: Victims Lists, Passenger Manifests, and the Alleged Hijackers

There is plenty in the official record to immediately hold impeachment hearings on Bush, Cheney and other's "negligence", when they had plenty of warnings, had drilled for planes as weapons for years and even had drills surrounding 9/11 that mimicked the attacks

911 Timeline

Here's the article in full:

Guest column: All-knowing mastermind of 9/11? Hard to believe

The June 6 article in the Register portraying Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the Guantanamo detainee implicated and to be tried by the U.S. military for "masterminding" the Sept. 11 attacks, raises a number of interesting questions.

For instance, what is it precisely that he is being charged with masterminding? Is Khalid Mohammed held to be responsible for neutralizing and incapacitating the entire U.S. air-defense system at once, enabling four attacks to go unintercepted?

Is it alleged that Khalid Mohammed as a mastermind was somehow responsible for getting a failed rookie pilot - who couldn't guide a Cessna - to fly a 144-foot-wide airliner all the way through the 16-foot-wide hole that its entry created at ground level into the Pentagon without leaving any wreckage outside the hole larger than you could hold in your hand?

And is it likewise alleged that the execution of his master plan made it possible for stooges crashing a mere two jet airliners into the World Trade Center complex to bring down three of its steel-frame skyscrapers by both impacts, plus causing jet-fuel (kerosene) fires sufficiently hot to melt or weaken the massively reinforced steel to a sudden breaking point (a first), in a way that perfectly mimicked the results of pre-set controlled demolitions? (Not to mention dozens of day-of-the-event reports by those present of massive explosions ahead of time, suppressed until their release was forced by court order nearly four years later. See David Ray Griffin, "Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11," John Knox Press, 2006.)

Is he charged with being responsible also for the plan carried out by the airliner that ended up crashing straight into the ground in Pennsylvania, leaving no recoverable wreckage at the site, but scattering it instead across 10 miles of countryside? Was it his planning that got all of the alleged 19 mass murderers on board the four airliners without registering their presence on any of the available flight lists of the planes?

Because, in a nutshell, those were the verifiable facts of those perplexing, related Sept. 11 incidents. Notably, he confesses that he, too, would have been on one of the planes, if only he had not failed to wangle a passport. But, I would submit, if he is found by the military tribunal to have masterminded all four of those officially alleged results of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks (and his prosecutors have guaranteed a conviction of him and his cohorts), he would have to be recognized as the greatest criminal mastermind of all time.

So, why should we care about the truth behind any of these events? Because the official version is revealed as a sham by the facts, and, as Voltaire said, "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." And that is what has happened, with more than 1 million lives and a chunk of our freedoms and way of life lost in wars foisted on the world as a result of an unsubstantiated, implausible and discredited conspiracy theory.

Must the disastrous reflex reactions to still not properly investigated events continue to occur, define us and tie us down? To quote the renowned Rabbi Abraham Heschel: "The opposite of good is not evil, it is indifference." There is too much of that today!

In the words of a retired member of Congress, "If you don't get involved, you'll never make a difference."

"the 16-foot-wide hole that its entry created at ground level in

>>"the 16-foot-wide hole that its entry created at ground level into the Pentagon"

DEBUNKED. Long ago.


It's very sad to see this claim posted all over the place, but this is how the Pentagon argument is kept alive and can ultimately sink us in one easy weekend campaign by CNN, Rolling Stone, etc. that features the videos of AA77 hitting the building and how we were all nuts to think it "never existed."

They'll be laughing for a long time over that one.

The best summary of easily debunked errors in Pentagon claims is here --

Pentagon Attack Errors

Numerous points based on the physical evidence of the crash site seem to make an overwhelming cumulative case against a 757 having crashed there, provided one ignores the eyewitness evidence. However, most of these points involve some error in evaluating the evidence. Those errors include the following.

* 'A Boeing 757 could not have executed the attack maneuver'
* 'Eyewitnesses saw a small plane'
* 'The Pentagon attack left no aircraft debris'
* 'Aircraft crashes always leave large debris'
* 'The Pentagon attack left only a small impact hole'
* 'The wings of a 757 should have been visible outside the Pentagon'
* 'Engine parts from the Pentagon crash don't match a 757'
* 'Standing columns in the Pentagon impact hole preclude the crash of a 757'
* 'The C-ring punch-out hole was made by a warhead'
* 'Flight-path obstacles can't be reconciled with the crash of a 757'
* 'Only A Small Plane or Missile Could Have Caused Pentagon Damage'
* 'The Pentagon Attack Plane was a Boeing 737 Instead of a Boeing 757'

I think a large plane indeed

I think a large plane indeed crashed into the Pentagon and authorities have done their utmost best to create a lot of mystery about it. False witnesses, blowing a hole in the C-ring, withholding video evidence etc.

Anyways, here's my collection of Pentagon witnesses. Many claim to have seen a large airliner, only a few mention a small jet.

Two testimonies are especially interesting:

Witness Pentagon, FOX, 9/11, 16:39

Mr. Aziz el Hallan brings a piece of the plane with him to the studio. His testimony was scrutinized by some folks at PFT. You can read about it here:

Pentagon witness, Don Wright, ABC, 9/11, 10:05

Mr. Wright claims he saw a small commuter plane. When he's asked where the plane came from, he answer 'from the south'. When Peter Jennings asks wether it came up along the river or a across the land, he becomes silent and then repeats 'it came from the south'...The whole thing sounds awfully scripted.
Please watch my movie: The Third Tower