Ongetwijfeld is dit boek het meest omvangrijke boek over de gebeurtenissen van 9/11 met een schat van informatie die je nooit in de mainstream media zal vinden. Of het ook het beste is laat ik aan het oordeel van de lezer over. Hier zijn alvast de hightlights:

• Maximaliseren van het schokeffect: duidelijk het doel van de aanslagplegers: het scenario was op dat vlak perfect:
  Surely the event was staged in such a way as to increase the shock effect: a typically terrorist plan. Let us analyse it in detail. 9/11. The date of the attack. In the United States 911 is the telephone number for emergencies. Probably just a coincidence. And yet… after September 11, 9/11 has certainly become a date associated, more than ever, with the idea of crisis and emergency. The three targets hit were among the most important symbols of America’s power, and three distinctly unique buildings. Bringing down two of them ― The Twin Towers ― and damaging the third one ― the Pentagon ― generated an extraordinary shock wave among Americans, and also created a lasting impression worldwide. The double attack on the Twin Towers was a huge media event. The first airplane attracted everyone’s attention to the scene, so that the impact of the second plane could then be filmed from all possible angles and aired live all over the world. The image of people throwing themselves off the Towers in flames had a dramatic impact on the memories of viewers, forcing all of them to fully perceive the immense horror of the tragedy that was unfolding before their eyes.
• Zouden radicale moslims dit werkelijk bedacht hebben?
  The collapse of the Towers is the cathartic moment when the shock reaches its climax, forever remaining in the minds of those in front of the TV screen. News commentators paint the picture with terrifying details: there might have been over 50,000 people inside the building. While the skyscrapers collapse, millions of viewers imagine tens of thousands of innocent people dying before their eyes, then and there. The number of victims will slowly decrease. In fact there are 30,000; in fact, 15,000; in fact, 10,000; in fact, 5,000; in fact, 2,998; in fact, 2,843; in fact, 2,7525. Finally, the number of casualties represents 10% of what was first estimated. But the shock induced in the viewers a figure 10-15 times larger. That is because memories and lasting impressions are best retained by the brain in a state of shock.
• Terwjil er alles aan gedaan werd om het schokeffect zo groot als mogelijk te maken (vergelijkbaar bij de moord op Kennedy, JFK was een zieke president en perfect chanteerbaar, maar toch werd er alles gedaan om de moord zo spectaculair en gruwelijk mogelijk te maken, een effect dat met name werd bereikt door de Zapruder-film met het uiteenspattende hoofd waardoor de indruk ontstaat dat die film deel uitmaakte van de psy-opp), werden de aanslagen zo gepleegd dat het aantal slachtoffers zo miniem mogelijk waren (echt wel iets voor fanatieke moslimfundamentalisten):
  Flight 93, falling over Pennsylvania, has the purpose of increasing the horror in the viewer’s minds, foreboding a potential, more dramatic situation ― a plane crashing into the United States Capitol, killing thousands of senators, or into the White House, wiping off the face of the earth America’s number one symbol ― but which, fortunately, has been avoided. No doubt about it, given the circumstances nothing could have had a more powerful shock effect for the American population. Let us direct our attention to the damages inflicted by the attacks. And, behold, here we have the first bizarre anomaly: the plan of the attackers had been devised with the purpose of minimizing the loss. Something which is very unusual for terrorists, especially, if we are talking about fanatic Muslim fundamentalists. Let us see how the loss was minimized. Undoubtedly the time of the attack had been purposefully chosen and not left to chance. Before launching an attack of such proportions, the day, the hour, the exact moment of launch are carefully evaluated by the contrivers. Well, choosing that day and hour for the attack on the Twin Towers had as a result a smaller number of victims than it would have had at any other time. September 11 started out as a day when New York City held primary elections, therefore many employees that worked inside the World Trade Center were to arrive later that day. Even more relevant is the analysis of the hour of the attack: at 8.46 in the morning ― the moment the first airliner struck ― more than half of the people that usually filled the two skyscrapers hadn’t arrived at work yet. The first plane crashed high up into the tower, somewhere around the 96th floor, allowing the people that were inside those ninety stories below to save themselves. Above the point of impact there were still fifteen stories more, where a few hundred people were stuck. The next plane crashed into the second tower after eighteen minutes, penetrating the building around the 81st floor, therefore, much lower; meanwhile, most of the people that had been in those thirty floors above, inside the second Tower, had had the possibility to escape. If the airplanes had hit two hours later, aiming above the 45th floor (a little above the other buildings in the area), the number of casualties would have been a little over 30,000 instead of 3000, which is ten times less. The subsequent conclusion is that, owing to reasons contradicting the image of the Muslim fundamentalist, the terrorists had meticulously planned the attack with the purpose of producing as few victims as possible, while concentrating on the shock effect induced in the American population.
  Also, let us add that a similar strategy was used for the attack on the Pentagon. The wing that got hit was being renovated at the time and thus was less occupied.
  Out of the 20,000 people inside the Pentagon at the moment of the attack, 186 died. Therefore, these were the first effects of the 9/11 attacks and the first question we should ask ourselves is: who was interested in deeply traumatizing American public opinion and, at the same time, affecting the whole world while being careful to have as few victims as possible? I know that answering the first part of the question is easy, but the second part gives us a  sudden stomach ache since, from the whole turn of events, we get the feeling that something doesn’t quite fit.
• Inderdaad, deze anomalie alleen al zou ons wantrouwig moeten maken t.a.v. het officiële verhaal. David McGowan wijst erop dat bij het instorten van de Twin Towers niemand in de omgeving om het leven kwam. WTC7 stortte in toen het helemaal verlaten was. Er is ook iets heel merkwaardigs als je deze aanslag vergelijkt met de eerste op het WTC in 1993: toen was het idee: we blazen de kelder onder één toren op zodat deze op de andere toren valt. Ze gebruikten toen gewoon te weinig explosieven. Oplossing: gewoon meer explosieven gebruiken en je doodt 50.000 slachtoffers. Dus waarom het de tweede keer op zo'n ingewikkelde manier proberen? We moeten de daders dus elders gaan zoeken. En dan kom je terecht bij de neoconservatieven en hun plan voor hernieuwde dominantie van de V.S. maar daarvoor was wel een "new Pearl Harbour" nodig:
  From that document we learn that the members of Bush’s cabinet had planned taking over military control of the Persian Gulf area long before, regardless if Saddam Hussein was at the head of Iraq or not. Iran is also mentioned as a potential threat to American interests. American military forces must be transformed as to be able to “fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars”. This military make-over needs an “increase in defense spending gradually to a minimum level of 3.5 to 3.8 percent of gross domestic product, adding $15 billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually.”
  “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalysing event ― like a new Pearl Harbor” ― the document states. Strange. Let’s see if I understood well. In September of 2000 an official document of an organization led by those who, a few months later, were to govern the United States clearly specifies that a catastrophic event ― such as a new Pearl Harbor ― would allow rapidly fulfilling their own goals. Hmmm…. Prediction? Foreseeing? Or… self-fulfilling prophecy? Just for the record, let us mention that shortly after the September 11 attacks the United States Congress approved by emergency procedure the allotment of 40 billion dollars to finance the war against terrorism. It goes without saying that the annual increase in defense spending was to be maintained in perfect agreement with what the members of the Project for a New American Century had predicted and formulated before even taking over the government of the United States.
• (Punt van contentie hier: ging het werkelijk over een nieuwe AMERIKAANSE eeuw? Of moeten we eerder richting Israël denken? Wie waren die "neoconservatieven" eigenlijk?)
  Maar goed laten we naar de volgende anomolie gaan...Veel mensen leken over "voorkennis" te beschikken:
  - How come that on the 10th of September 2001 many of the Pentagon’s officials cancelled their airline flights for the next day?13 - How come that on the night of September 10 the mayor of Los Angeles Willie Brown got a telephone call from a member of the airport’s “security personnel” warning him about the danger of travelling by plane? On the morning of September 11, Brown should have flown to New York.14 - How come the CIA and the Pentagon did nothing to prevent the attacks, despite the fact that the secret services of many other countries warned them about the imminence of the attack, mentioning precise dates?15 - Why did they abolish a forty-year-old rule that permitted airline pilots to have a weapon inside the cockpit, two months before the September 11 attacks?16 - How come that, on the 7th of September, 2001 the FBI closed down an internet provider that hosted mainly Arab information sites, among which was that of the television channel Al Jazeera?
  - During the days preceding September 11, American stock markets registered strong depreciatory speculation. The former German Minister, von Bülow, estimated the total value of the profit gained from these speculations to be around fifteen billion dollars. How could these speculators have been so sure that the attacks were to be carried out? How did they know American airplanes wouldn’t intercept the airliners hijacked by terrorist? Would they have invested so much money in speculation without being absolutely certain the attacks were to be carried out successfully? - On the morning of September 11 after being informed about the attack on the Twin Towers why did the President of the United States George W. Bush remain in the classroom of the school he was visiting, continuing to listen undisturbed for 10-20 minutes to a schoolgirl telling a story about a little goat?17 - Why did the secret services allow the President of the United States to remain in that school, although he might have been the next possible target of the terrorists? - Is it just a coincidence that exactly on September 11 one of the largest ever set of US military war games and drills was taking place, simulating virtually every aspect of the events which would go live on the same day?
  These are the names of some of the war games and drills which took place on that day: Operation Northern Vigilance, Operation Vigilant Guardian, Operation Northern Guardian, Operation Vigilant Warrior. For a comprehensive list and analysis look for Webster Tarpley’s 9/11: Synthetic Terror: Made in USA.
• Nog meer anomalieën en vragen:
  - Why didn’t NORAD (North American Aerospace Defence Command) respond immediately to the attack, according to procedure? - Why didn’t any of the pilots of the four hijacked airliners warn the air traffic controllers about what was going on aboard the planes? - How could all the eight black boxes of the aircrafts (two for each plane) have been destroyed or damaged beyond retrieval? - Who are the designers of the inside trading that led to the crash of the stocks belonging to airline and insurance companies on Wall Street during the days preceding the attacks? - After only three weeks from September 11 Bush submitted the Patriot Act for approval, a huge 342 page-long flawlessly written volume. How could such a gigantic document have been prepared in such a short time span? - Why did Bush explicitly ask the head of the democratic opposition inside the Senate not to investigate the circumstances of the most serious terrorist attack ever witnessed in American history?18
• Bijzondere incompetentie treft NORAD die dag:
  The first airliner, American Airlines flight 11, deviates from its scheduled path at 8.13 a.m. At 8.57 it crashes into the first WTC skyscraper. NORAD (North American Aerospace Defence Command) orders the Otis Air National Guard Base to launch two F-15 fighters at 8.46 ― 30 minutes after the Boeing veered off course. Such a delay is usually unheard of in the case of the best controlled airspace in the world. Nevertheless NORAD defended itself by stating that the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) did not inform its officials about the hijacking of the airliner until 8.401. This occurrence turns out to be very strange ― blaming the air traffic controllers and their superiors who let twenty-seven minutes pass from the moment of the hijacking until informing NORAD, while standard interception procedures impose scrambling in three and a half minutes at most.2 No one stated any news about disciplinary measures or measures under criminal law being taken against the air traffic controllers guilty of such gross, macroscopic incompetence.
  Even so, the response of NORAD doesn’t fit procedure regulations since the order to intercept should have been given immediately and six minutes of delay is a lot, especially considering that there are two hundred and fifty kilometres between the Otis Base and the World Trade Center in New York, a distance that an F-15 going at top speed should cover in fifteen minutes at most. Nevertheless, if we took for granted the excuse and found the delay justifiable, the figures still wouldn’t add up; at least this is what Scott Shuger, an independent American journalist, stated. According to Shuger’s calculations, if the F-15 aircraft that left Otis at exactly 8.52 a.m. had flown at top speed, they truly wouldn’t have gotten to New York in time to intercept the first plane, but they would have been there in time ― or almost in time ― to intercept the second aircraft that crashed into the South Tower at 9.02 a.m.3 But at the time of the second impact the fighters were more than a hundred kilometres away from the WTC. On the other hand Shuger’s theory is also contested.4 The topic for debate is the actual top speed of an F-15 given that Shuger had based his theory on perfect flight conditions, unattainable in reality. Since the F-15 aircraft and its flight achievements are things I know nothing of, I am only informing you about this debate without expressing any personal opinions. I only add that Scott Shuger, the first person to have written about this, died a few months later in an underwater fishing accident.5 Similar inefficiencies ― if not worse ― happened with the other flights as well.
• Timing en positie van crash is een beetje ...off:
  But it has a few weak spots that can’t be overlooked. For instance: why did the terrorists attack the Twin Towers during the first hours of the morning when they were almost empty? Two hours later there could have been tens of thousands of victims. Why didn’t they hit lower, hence increasing the number of victims and the probability that the skyscrapers crash? Have you never asked yourself these questions? Do it now! Play Sherlock Holmes, version 1.0! Why did the terrorists hit the Twin Towers before they were filled with people? Ask yourself this and give yourself an answer, but not any answer that would only temporarily settle the issue: it has to be a convincing answer; otherwise it’s no use because we are not talking here about some event improvised one sunny day by a bunch of kids in search for adventure.
  In the case of such an attack everything is meticulously planned and analysed in detail; nothing is left to chance. In this kind of operation timing is of the essence. Then why didn’t the aircraft crash into the Towers at any other moment of the day, thus producing ten times more victims? Why didn’t any of the planes target the nuclear plant at Indiana Point, less than forty kilometres from New York? One of the Boeings flew over the plant seven minutes before reaching the Towers and the second one flew in close proximity less than two minutes away from the first airliner.
• Opnieuw de eerste grote anomalie:
  But instead, things weren’t really like that: the cruel terrorists weren’t in fact so evil deep down and ― no one knows why ― they acted in such a way as to cause as few victims as possible while obtaining a major spectacular effect. We all remember how official American sources stated not long ago that Al-Qaeda had declared its main objective was killing as many Americans as possible. Then why didn’t they do so if they had the opportunity? Why did they rather kill 3,000 Americans by attacking during the first hours of the morning instead of tens of thousands if they had attacked two hours later or ― better yet, for their final goal ― millions of US citizens (if they had chosen the nuclear plant as their target)? Even the attack on the Pentagon could have caused more serious damage if it had targeted any other wing of the building. If the attacks were truly the work of Al-Qaeda, don’t you think they have met all the conditions lawfully required in order to lift Al-Qaeda’s licence for organizing terrorist attacks on the grounds of gross incompetence? In criminology the analysis of the motive is a crucial piece of the puzzle in re-establishing the truth. Therefore, what motive might those terrorists have had to cause as few victims as possible? And if causing fewer dead bodies wasn’t their objective why didn’t they act otherwise, in a more lethal way, given that they had the opportunity? On the other hand there is a very simple question that no one has asked until now: how could Al-Qaeda have had so much faith in the success of its very own mission impossible? American military bases had only to follow standard security procedures for the hijacked planes to be intercepted by fighters before reaching their targets; and the terrorists couldn’t have ignored this; no one plans such a complex terrorist attack without asking themselves how enemy defenses are to respond. They couldn’t have been sure that American defense systems weren’t going to be activated. Then why did they insist on acting this way, without concerning themselves with the fact that they were going to be intercepted and taken down?
• De terroristen toonden dus ook geen enkele bezorgdheid inzake mogelijke interventies die dag. Ook al bijzonder. Maar anomalieën en bijzonderheden en toevalligheden sterven maar een langzame dood, als het ooit al zover komt:
  Perhaps we shouldn’t overlook the fact that a few months after refusing to approve Operation Northwoods and starting a process of restructuring the CIA Kennedy was assassinated, a sign that in American politics coincidences were popular forty years ago as well.1 Do you really believe that due to some crisis of conscience the CIA has changed for the better since?
• Speelde de Secret Service een rol?
  The fact that the American secret services ― or more precisely a part of them ― played an important role in the plan is also suggested by a surprising aspect, to say the least: according to the statement made immediately after September 11 by the press secretary for the U.S. President, Ari Fleischer, the terrorists had knowledge of secret codes for Air Force One, the aircraft carrying the President of the U.S.2 Later on Fleischer denied the statement, arguing that he had received erroneous information; if you were to choose, which one of the two Fleischers would you believe? In addition, as the World Net Daily3 maintains, besides the secret codes for Air Force One the terrorists also had knowledge of top-secret signals for the White House, the DEA, the Federal Aviation and some other intelligence agencies. And not just that: supposedly they were also in possession of penetration codes for the electronic surveillance systems of the NSA (National Security Agency).
• Werd Bush gechanteerd? Wat hij niet betrokken?
  And what kind of blackmail may the President of the United States have been subjected to? In the evening the name of Osama bin Laden was already circulating and Afghanistan was also mentioned. The name of Afghanistan was a surprise for American public opinion but, if we take a look backstage, we’ll see that the surprise isn’t that surprising. Coincidentally, American foreign policy had a campaign agenda to follow, which ― by chance, of course! ― had scheduled precisely a war with Afghanistan. The fact that the war in Afghanistan had been programmed a long time before is common knowledge; and the reason wasn’t that the Taliban didn’t respect women but because they didn’t allow an important oil pipeline across their country. A little while back, in the summer, the date the war was going to start was also indicated: October 2001.7 The only thing missing was the pretext for starting the war, but as we can see the pretext magically appeared the moment it was needed the most. “All of these elements put together do not make up a plausible theory” ― this is the thought that arises in the minds of any of those readers used to the official version of events.
• En dan is er nog de anthrax-affaire:
  Very strange, this “science fiction” novel we have outlined backstage, isn’t it? What a relief it’s only a work of fiction!... Although, look, the department of epidemiology of the University of California has proven that the source of the anthrax traces on those letters was a US government programme.9 Unbelievable. In a sea of uncertainties, the mass media certified two things: that the September 11 attacks as well as those terrible anthrax letters had been the work of terrorists and Islamic fundamentalists. On the other hand, in March 2002 even the BBC had to surrender and admit the new version of events ― that the letters containing traces of anthrax were a part of an “educational” programme of the US authorities.10 But is it really impossible to find out who exactly fabricated those infamous anthrax letters? Of course not; it is just that newspapers and television won’t tell you about it, and you are much too lazy to start searching the internet where you can find a lot of information that has been made public: first of all, the analysis of the DNA sequence of those anthrax traces has proven, beyond any doubt, that it was a bacteria produced in a US military laboratory11; in addition, there are those who say that only one person in the United States could have had access to those kind of samples of anthrax: a certain Dr. Hatfill, who, of course, had arduously collaborated with the CIA during his career and who might have been one of the few people in America able to weaponise the anthrax spores ― in other words, to refine them in such a way as to turn them into a lethal biological weapon. Dr. Hatfill hasn’t been arrested, but he has been in the limelight for a long time in America, and there are those who claim that he is now fighting for his life because they are preparing an Oswald Solution for him (Oswald ― Kennedy’s alleged assassin, killed afterwards to shut him up).
  That doesn’t mean that Dr. Hatfill is the actual culprit. That would be much too easy. On the contrary, given that he has been publicly named as the main person for spreading the anthrax spores he may well be entirely innocent. In the end, one half of a scapegoat is better that nothing.
  And, yet again, here is how the most cruel and bloody terrorists ever to walk on the face of the Earth (as Muslim attackers are often presented by the media) turn out to be quite humanitarian, trying to inflict terror ― yes ― but a kind of terror with a humane face, a kind of terror so abstract that, when applied in real life, it produces as few victims as possible.
  As a postscript let us mention the fact that bio-terrorism involving anthrax is an excellent business for the pharmaceutical industry, which is never a bad thing.14 Especially if the only company that owns the license for producing the vaccine seems to be a certain BioPort Inc., a company created specifically for filling the niche market ― mass vaccination against anthrax ― nonexistent up until this company was established. At BioPort Inc. we discover the fact that a well known “global investment company” ― The Carlyle Group ― has contributed to its capital. In Italy we often talk about conflict of interests but I have to admit that, compared to the Americans, we are amateurs.
  The Carlyle Group15 is a very nice industrial and military company that has employed ― oh, what a coincidence! ― many of the people we have already mentioned, starting with Bush and Bin Laden’s family members, and continuing with James Baker (former United States Secretary of State) and John Major (former British Prime Minister); if I have made you curious, I recommend you research on your own on the internet.16 It is fascinating to discover that so many people able to decide when to start a war own shares in a company that obtains profit only if there are wars.
  On the other hand (consider this another marginal note to the text), the vaccine against anthrax turned out to be an excellent business during the first Gulf War. It is of very little importance that as a result of the infamous Gulf War Syndrome ― caused by the vaccine itself, according to some specialists ― between eleven and fifteen thousand American military men died far away from the cameras, which is probably why television channels have never mentioned them.
• Lieutenant General Mahmud Ahmed, directeur-generaal van ISI, de Pakistaanse geheime dienst en financier van de terroristen was op een opvallende plaats op 9/11:
  And on the morning of September 11, while the terrorists were carrying out their suicidal missions, where do you think Mahmoud Ahmad was? He was having breakfast with Bob Graham, the chairman of the Congress and Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and with Porter Goss, another congressman familiar with the world of intelligence agencies. Undoubtedly, after what had happened, they didn’t run out of topics to discuss. Did I get this right? Let us sum up: the September 11 terrorists were financed by a person whose chief was a guest of one of the top leaders in the US administration, at the moment the attacks happened.
• Nog meer toevalligheden:
  And it is probably also a coincidence that many of these stock market speculations were operated through Deutschebank/A.B. Brown, managed until 1998 by the executive director of the CIA, A. B. Krongard, incumbent at the time of the events, right?
• Simulaties die dag transformeerden plots in reële events:
  Who knows, perhaps after all coincidences are like handkerchiefs pulled out of a conjourer’s hat, one tugging the next one with it without there being an actual connection between them… Then, here is the cherry on top of the cake: the irony of fate (was it really fate that was ironic?) that on the morning of September 11 a military exercise of vast proportions ― code name Vigilant Guardian ― which simulated the armed response to the hijacking of airliners, was taking place in the United States. Therefore that morning radars showed no less than twenty-two signals of hijacked aircrafts, of which ― “by accident” ― four of them turned out to be for real. The cherry isn’t sweet enough? Then you should also know that, also as a coincidence, the same morning the CIA was also carrying out a simulated exercise for the hypothetical situation in which a plane should crash into a building.22 With these simulations magically transforming into real attacks, we find ourselves tangled in the threads of a story similar to the plot of a good novel, a hybrid between Frederik Forsythe and Mack Reynolds, much more exciting than that mediocre B-movie - America under attack - which the media hype convinced us to watch on television when it came out.
• Maar OBL erkende toch dat hij achter de aanvallen zat niet?
  The analysis performed by the Germans revealed the fact that the translation which the Americans had done contained significant errors, to the extent of severely altering the complex meaning of the message. What is more, the sound quality was so bad that certain fragments were impossible to understand, and the shots in which bin Laden appeared were taken from a distance, so much so that it was impossible to figure out if the words uttered corresponded to the movements of the lips. Right after that, the press worldwide published a series of articles which strongly questioned the authenticity of that tape recording28 though in the meanwhile the large media networks had already established in everyone’s mind that the American authorities were in possession of irrefutable proof of Osama bin Laden’s guilt. It mattered very little that Osama the repentant from that tape recording not only said nothing to incriminate himself, but looked quite changed in front of the cameras, with a smaller nose, ears of a different shape, chubby cheeks and a few extra pounds on him.
  ncidentally, quite a few people discovered bizarre, unconvincing aspects in the following, alleged bin Laden video tapes. One of these29, for example, showed him holding the microphone with his right hand while the FBI report about America’s public enemy number one stated that Osama was left-handed.
• G.W. Bush verklaarde tot twee maal toe dat hij het eerste vliegtuig in de Noordtoren had zien crashen wat onmogelijk was, want de beelden kwamen pas later beschikbaar...of was het? Versprak hij zicht? Tot twee keer toe?
  George W. Bush declared not once, but twice, that he saw the impact of the first plane. Here are his exact statements, transcribed from the White House’s official website: 1. “Well, Jordan, you’re not going to believe what state I was in when I heard about the terrorist attack. I was in Florida. And my chief of staff, Andy Card -- actually I was in a classroom talking about a reading program that works. And I was sitting outside the classroom waiting to go in, and I saw an airplane hit the tower -- the TV was obviously on, and I use to fly myself, and I said, “There’s one terrible pilot.” And I said, “It must have been a horrible accident.” But I was whisked off there -- I didn’t have much time to think about it, and I was sitting in the classroom, and Andy Card, my chief who was sitting over here walked in and said, “A second plane has hit the tower. America’s under attack.”37 2. “Anyway, I was sitting there, and my Chief of Staff -- well, first of all, when we walked into the classroom, I had seen this plane fly into the first building. There was a TV set on. And you know, I thought it was pilot error and I was amazed that anybody could make such a terrible mistake. And something was wrong with the plane, or -- anyway, I’m sitting there, listening to the briefing, and Andy Card came and said, “America is under attack.”
• Ook het met onderscheppen van de vliegtuigen liep vanalles mis en waar was de afweer van het Pentagon? Waarom was NIEMAND in heel het Pentagon verontrust, terwijl héél Amerika de beelden van New York op tv kon zien?
  Normally the fighters would have scrambled and intercepted the Boeings in a matter of minutes, according to standard procedure. Then they would have eventually asked for the President’s authorization to take them down, but this is a redundant detail, a problem that was never broached, given that on that fatal morning no airliner was intercepted. Intercepting a flight which has deviated from its path is a standard, automatic procedure, and yet it was never set on course, not even when it was obvious that the Boeing 757 was heading right for the capital. Unlike in the case of the attacks on the Twin Towers, the excuse that no one would have expected such an attack on Washington is completely ludicrous, since “such an attack” had just happened in New York an hour before. All right, anyone is free to pretend they are an idiot, but there is a limit to everything! Second of all, the Pentagon has its own defence system, equipped with cutting-edge technology, including rocket launchers. It has its own radars, which can detect high-speed flying objects. As a matter of fact, the Pentagon’s anti-aircraft defence system was conceived to protect the centre of America’s military power from the most sophisticated missile attacks; therefore, the hypothesis according to which the surveillance and defence systems weren’t activated is highly unlikely, since there was no surprise ― half of the population of the United States were aware that a hijacked aircraft was heading for Washington. The mass media knew it, the audience had found out, and yet the military men from the Pentagon were caught unawares. As John Judge, a co-founder of the National Coalition on Political Assassination, has declared, the information regarding a Boeing which was approaching Washington had already been transmitted by a local television, Channel 8.1 Even if we were to assume that the entire Pentagon personnel were playing Tetris on their desktop computers or were wasting time with a game of Solitaire, I cannot believe that in that whole Pentagon there was no one ― and I am not saying a General, but at least a janitor ― who could have seen a television and raised the alarm.
  In conclusion ― and this is the result of our first considerations ― we must admit that it is absolutely unlikely for a civilian airliner to have breezily transgressed Washington’s airspace, plunged in a spiral descent over its target and darted upon the Pentagon without meeting with the slightest gesture of defence from the world’s most efficient army.
• De evolutie van de eerste getuigenissen inzake de gebeurtenissen in het Pentagon waren ook zeer merkwaardig te noemen:
  Let’s go on now to the witness statements. We have a few ― not many, that’s true ― which nevertheless reveal interesting contradictions. Steve Patterson, a graphics artist who lived on the 14th floor of a building in Pentagon City, declared that he had seen a silver object which made a screech similar to that made by a fighter jet, and that looked as if it could hold about eight to ten people aboard, flying low and heading for the Pentagon.3 Soon after, Steve Patterson couldn’t be found and wasn’t available for any other statements, except one for Paris Match. Strangely enough, however, his new version didn’t contain any reference to the aircraft’s capacity of eight to ten people or to the jet fighter-like noise it had made. Another eyewitness was Kirk Milburn, who saw an airplane going down with a deafening sound, followed by two distinct huge explosions. A third one was Asework Hagos, who, while driving on Columbia Pike, had seen an airplane with the American Airlines logo flying low and crashing into the Pentagon building. A fourth witness, Tom Seibert, a network engineer who worked specifically for the Pentagon, hadn’t seen a plane, but he had heard a noise similar to that made by a missile, followed by a loud explosion. These four eyewitness statements were picked up shortly after the events and published the next day in the Washington Post. In the documentary film 911 in Plane Site, made by the editorial staff of The Power Hour4, there is an interview with a witness, taken a few minutes after the incident, precisely with the background of the smoking Pentagon. The man said he had seen a cruise-like missile hitting the building. This precious interview was to disappear quickly from the media network.
  Later on, other testimonies came up; other people stated they had seen a flying object which looked like a winged cruise missile only to take their statements back soon after, saying that they had used the image of the rocket metaphorically.6 However, Donald Timmerman, a thirty-six year old man who lived nearby, declared he had seen a Boeing 757 belonging to American Airlines falling on the lawn in front of the Pentagon and then crashing into the building. What a shame, though, that all the photos he took after the incident prove that the front lawn wasn’t damaged at all by the alleged airplane crash!7 Other witnesses also claim to have seen an American Airlines aircraft, but almost all of them are in the army or have some connection to the Pentagon or the government. Consequently, the strange way in which those who declared at first that they saw a small aircraft or an object similar to a missile retracted their statements, as well as the way in which television interviews which sustained such a hypothesis were censored, strengthen the suspicion that the official version has a lot to hide.
  Another interesting statement comes from one of the firefighters who responded to the incident. Ed Plaugher, fire chief of Arlington County, confessed that he and his men were not let near the place of impact, where only FEMA teams (Federal Emergency Management Agency) were allowed to intervene. Answering one specific question, Ed Plaugher admitted that he hadn’t seen any remains consistent with a plane in the opening made on the front side of the building and no traces of fuselage in the surrounding area.10 Six months later Ed Plaugher suddenly remembered stating that actually he had seen pieces of fuselage, wings, landing gear, pieces of motor and seats there.
• En wat met de foto's en schaars vrijgegeven beelden?
  The images are, in effect, clear, and yet by looking at them one immediately gets the feeling that something is amiss. At first glance we may not realize what it is that is missing, precisely. Though, in all of these images there is a dissonance, something bothersome, although we can’t exactly pinpoint it. The feeling that something has been left out, something important, something that should have been there but apparently isn’t. Wait a minute! Perhaps… aha, I get it. Nooo… You don’t mean to say that what’s missing is... Nooo… Damn it, the plane is totally missing from the photos! And not just that; there is the front lawn too, as intact as a golf course. Anyway, let’s not jump to conclusions. If the plane can’t be found outside the building that means that it completely penetrated it. Therefore the front side should have a gap that corresponds to a gigantic Boeing 757, while on the inside of the building the plane that on the outside hasn’t left any trace of its disintegration, should be found. The breach on the front side… In most of the photos there’s no point in looking for it, because the wing of the building collapsed half an hour after the impact. However, in some of the photos taken a few moments after the event, the front side is still intact; therefore, we should be able to see the breach. You can try it too. If the photos we show you don’t have a good enough resolution, you can look for better versions on the internet. I know. It isn’t easy to discover the gap. And yet it exists. It must be there and, what is more, it must be remarkably large, since a whole Boeing 757 disappeared through it.
  Finally, some sort of an opening is visible. It is only six metres wide and it is on the first floor a few metres above the ground. A Boeing 757 with its landing gear lowered is thirteen metres high, which means that, in order to have hit the building like that, it obviously had to have flown upside down, with its landing gear up… Who would have thought Arab Cessna pilots were capable of such daredevil stunts? You are probably saying that the landing gear might not have been lowered. But isn’t that an automatic procedure, once an airliner is getting ready to land? All right, I agree that the terrorists were not getting ready to land, but how could the plane have known that? Modern aircrafts are computerized ― in other words, they have their own brain, which struggles to maintain it in the air, even when the pilot makes catastrophic mistakes that could endanger the airplane’s safety. Summing up, we could say that modern airliners don’t want to crash into buildings and it’s not easy to get one to fly close to the ground without any landing gear at a speed of about 500-700 km/h. A speed of 500-700 km/h? Exactly! Officially, that was the speed of the Boeing 757 on impact.
• Nog meer merkwaardigheden inzake het Boeing die in de Pentagon zogezegd crashte. Met name waarom deden de terroristen met het vliegtuig allerlei halsbrekende toeren die de kans om het vliegtuig precies in het gebouw te plantten zo KLEIN mogelijk maakten?
  And then, how could a plane lose altitude so fast ― as the official version states ― while maintaining such speed? Usually, in order to descend, an airliner has to decelerate first. That is, of course, if it doesn’t intend to plunge nose down… Admitting ― which doesn’t mean we assume such a hypothesis ― that all of this was technically possible, why did the terrorists need to resort to such a dangerous manoeuvre? I don’t have any information about similar manoeuvres performed on such a large aircraft and with the characteristics of a Boeing 757, so why did the terrorists have to try a feat that, in 99% of cases, would have ended with the plane crashing on the ground and not into the building?
  Let’s put it otherwise: how would you have done things if you were flying the aircraft, instead of the terrorist? Very simple: you would have plunged randomly into the roof, knowing very well that, wherever the plane crashed, it would have caused many victims. The Pentagon’s roof has a very large surface, one hundred and seventeen thousand square metres, and is thus very easy to target from the air. On the contrary, the front side is only twenty-four metres high, and at a speed of 500-700 km/h isn’t easy to run into. What is more, crashing into the roof, even somewhere at random, would have caused a lot more victims and damage on a wider surface, victims among whom there might have also been a General or someone of a higher rank, while the wing targeted by the Boeing 757 was almost deserted due to the fact that repair works were being carried out, and consequently there were only a few victims, among whom a couple of low rank officials. We ask ourselves again: why did the terrorists act in such a manner as to cause as few victims as possible at the Pentagon too? We are left with the mystery of the breach in the wall. How did a plane so large manage to disappear entirely inside the building? A Boeing 757, wings and all, is thirty-eight metres wide. What trick did our aircraft use to go through a hole of only six metres in diameter? Could one of those illusionists that make trains and tanks disappear in front of a crowd of viewers have meddled in all of this? Well, the wings might have been left outside ― you’ll say ― broken by the impact with the wall, without causing a lot of damage. Very well, that sounds logical. Unfortunately, in the photos made at the scene immediately after the impact there are no traces of wings or any other remains from a plane.
  The official version is that, crashing into the wall at a speed of 500-700 km/h, the aircraft simply pulverized. The wings folded like those of a bat, being absorbed into the opening alongside the rest of the pulverized airplane. There, an unimaginable (it’s true, I can’t imagine it) blaze would have melted and “evaporated” the remains of the aircraft almost entirely ― and that is why it had been so hard to identify.
• De beelden en andere aanwijzingen, wijzen eerder op een raket:
  For better or for worse the only image outlined with any clarity is the white trace left by the flying object. Tell me now: how much time has passed since you’ve been at an airport and seen airliners land or take off? At low altitude a Boeing 757 doesn’t leave a trace of white smoke. Missiles, however ― and look what a coincidence! ― do.
  As a matter of fact, analysing the images of the explosion we can observe that it wasn’t an explosion of hydrocarbons, typical for airliner accidents, but one of high potential explosive, characteristic of missiles.
  This hypothesis is also confirmed by the fact that the firefighters tried to put out the fire with water and not with foam. Flames caused by kerosene are usually put out with foam because water can make things worse. So why did the firefighters use water?
• Maar "wetenschappers" zijn weer niet geïnteresseerd of kiezen de kant van de autoriteiten, lamzakken dat het zijn:
  Not interested in such details, the researchers at Purdue University concentrate their attention on creating a sophisticated 3D animation of the alleged incident.12 The film is so well done you almost end up believing it. What a shame, though, that the premises from which the scientists started in their huge endeavour are so implausible! And what a shame that in the short film the aircraft’s engines magically disappear; they vanish into thin air without any further explanation: we just see them disappearing at the moment of impact, without understanding the cause.
• Nog meer onwaarschijnlijkheden igv. van een Boeing 757:
  It seems obvious that three weeks of intense study and arduous prayer make wonders, since on the 11th of September Hani Hanjour manages to fly a Boeing 757 to Washington, and then manoeuvre it with the ability of a jet fighter pilot, achieving a rapid spiral descent, at 270° ― an extremely difficult movement for a Boeing; thus coming down near the Pentagon at a height of five, maybe ten metres from the ground, flying parallel with the ground and managing to pull up the nose of the aircraft at the last minute to pass over a nearby hill, maintaining a cruising speed of 800-830 km/h until the impact with the building, which happened at 9:37.
  Due to its collision with the sturdy walls of the Pentagon building, the airplane pulverizes (this would explain the lack of fuselage remains, inside or outside the building), the wings ― also pulverized on impact! ― nonetheless fold and are absorbed through the breach made by the aircraft (something which explains the fact they couldn’t be found outside the building); then the airplane penetrates the building completely (which would explain the fact that certain large parts, such as one of the engines, were missing) and finally it evaporates at a temperature of 2500°C (of the incredible characteristics of hydrocarbon combustion, I will present a long dissertation later on), and ― no one knows how ― the evaporate escapes through the windows (which explains why a hundred tons of melted metal are missing), without the flames affecting the upper floors.
  At the same time, the airplane’s very solid nose (and we thought the nose of a Boeing 757 was, actually, very delicate!) continues its trajectory, breaking the armed walls of no less than three building structures (which would explain the breach in the second wall of the third ring) and then vanishes into thin air, while the rest of a hundred tons of aircraft stop inside the first ring, where it also disappears into thin air. The airplane, which has magically vanished, reappears after a while in the memory of those who testified at the time of the incident that they hadn’t seen any aircraft, as well as in the storage where the remains which were found are carefully kept. The bodies also reappear, or, in other words, what remained of them, which are identified through DNA tests.14 Of course the DNA identification was carried out in military laboratories by army scientists.
  On the other hand, the content of the black boxes was destroyed beyond retrieval during the fire.
• Ze konden dus het DNA terug vinden, maar niet de zwarte dozen?
  As to the victims’ DNA, this proved to be much more resistant than the black boxes ― a DNA of remarkable resilience and patriotism, capable of surviving at temperatures over 2500°C (one of the official figures).
  As a matter of fact, all the victims of the incident at the Pentagon, except for one, were officially identified through DNA exams. We can’t help but notice that not all DNA behaves the same. It seems that the properties of DNA are totally different depending on where the person dies. For instance the DNA of the World Trade Center victims seems to have been of a lower quality, since it didn’t withstand the very high temperatures after the incident. On the internet there is a site, which instructs the relatives of the WTC victims on how to examine the DNA of those gone in the incident. Amateurs are advised that in many cases the DNA may be deteriorated beyond retrieval due to the very high temperatures to which the samples had been subjected. Even at body temperature ― we are told - the DNA in tissues is damaged by the presence of bacteria. DNA in bones and hair is, apparently, more resistant, but 150°C would be enough to destroy it too.16 This goes for to the victims at the World Trade Center.
  As for the DNA of the victims at the Pentagon, this is, as we have seen, much more robust, managing to withstand even temperatures of 2700°C. In fact the DNA of the victims of flight 93 which crashed in Pennsylvania also turned out to have distinctive qualities. Only 7% of the earthly remains of passengers and crewmembers were found, and yet all the victims have been identified through DNA tests.
  And why should that be strange? ― You’ll probably ask. Well, since only 7% of their remains (some say that it was actually only 4%) were found, it is obvious that we are talking about a medium quantity of tissue samples. The percentage might have differed from one case to the other (it is possible that more was found from the body of certain victims, 30% for example, while from others there might have been less than 1%). To manage to identify all the bodies relying only on this type of information is undoubtedly an extraordinary result.
• Wat met de "seismic waves"? Wat zegt dat signaal? Het wijst op een kleiner object dan een Boeing:
  Another method through which we could establish the possibility of a plane crashing into the Pentagon and the moment of impact is by studying the seismic waves generated by the incident. In the case of the airplanes which crashed into the Twin Towers, clear seismic waves were recorded. This is quite normal, since a Boeing 757 aircraft launched at maximum speed represents a considerable mass, capable of generating significant seismic waves at the moment of impact. According to the latest official version, the Boeing that crashed into the Pentagon was flying at over 800 km/h, at the moment of impact having therefore a mass equal (if not bigger) than that of the airplanes which crashed into the Twin Towers. Consequently there should have been an equal amount of seismic activity. However, according to the information gathered by different seismic recording stations, the impact with the Pentagon generated a faint seismic signal.
  By and large this means that the object which crashed into the Pentagon had a much smaller mass than that of a Boeing 757; this conclusion also fits with the small size of the object we can glimpse in the images taken by the surveillance cameras and with the characteristics of the damage it caused to the building.
• Donald Rumsfeld bleek die dag helderziende gaven te hebben:
  In an interview given to Lyric Wallwork Winik for Parade Magazine, the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, present in the Pentagon at the time of the attack, at some point said the following phrase: “Here we’re talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center” (this is how it was written down in a faithful transcript of the interview on an American military site).21 Rumsfeld practically states that the Pentagon was hit by a missile.
  It seems that Rumsfeld’s psychic abilities were even more impressive, since they had manifested themselves long before the events. Therefore in June 2001 Rumsfeld ordered the modification of the procedures which had to be carried out in the case a plane was hijacked. A strange initiative, as more than twenty years had passed since an airplane had been hijacked for the first time in the United States.
  And yet, there we have it, not even three months after this decision, Rumsfeld’s premonition comes true. Nevertheless, what exactly did our psychic alter? From that moment on (June 2001), he became the only one with the right to give or supervise the orders for intercepting hijacked airplanes. Very well, you’ll say. What a shame that ― as the air traffic controller, Robin Hordon declared ― when the “big moment” came and he was called to supervise the order to intercept, he refused to answer the telephone for a very long time…
• Verschillende deden van de 9/11 Commissie verspreken zich en spreken soms over een "raket":
  Years later Tim Roemer, a former 9/11 Commissioner, would commit the same slip of the tongue24 as Rumsfeld and speak about a missile instead of an airplane. And the same would also happen to former deputy attorney general Jamie S. Gorelick when questioning Donald Rumsfeld at the 9/11 Commission hearings25. Regarding the Pentagon attack, how many people who say “airplane” actually think “missile”? If no one in town saw the massive Boeing of flight 77, flying hesitantly over Washington in search of the Pentagon, then there were a lot of witnesses who saw another airplane in a place where there shouldn’t have been one: above the White House. And this information was immediately aired by television channels. John King, the CNN correspondent at the White House, commented live: “About 10 minutes ago there was a white jet circling overhead.
• Het mysterieuze "witte" vliegtuig boven het Witte Huis? Wat was dat voor iets?
  Now you generally don’t see planes in the area over the White House. (…)The Secret Service was very concerned.” The airplane’s appearance had also been signalled by another CNN correspondent, Kate Snow. A CNN camera even managed to record a few shots, although from afar.
  The news about the mysterious airplane was also aired by ABC, NBC and FOX, afterwards, being included in Richard A. Clarke’s famous book, Against All Enemies; the former chief counter-terrorism adviser tells us that the decision to evacuate the White House had been taken as a result of an incoming unidentified airplane (therefore, not of flight 77).
• Veel getuigenissen dus maar de Commissie zegt er niets over:
  And yet the official report of the investigation committee for the September 11 events mentions no such airplane. A suspicious omission, to say the least. Too bad that there aren’t any better quality photos than those taken by CNN, which would allow us to identify it! Patience, patience! The only aircraft you will certainly not see images of is flight 77, considering that it is very hard to film or photograph something which doesn’t exist. On the other hand, if, in this modern era, there is a plane which, on top of everything, flies all over the place, then there will certainly be someone to photograph it, even if only as a souvenir. This was the case with Linda Brookhart, evacuated alongside other people from the Old Executive Office Building, a White House annex: she saw the airplane and photographed it. This happened a little while before the Pentagon incident. Hers is a good-quality photo and it can be looked up on the internet. Later on, the same airplane appeared in a few shots of a documentary made by the Discovery Channel concerning September 11. Based on these images, the airplane was identified as an E-4B, a modified Boeing 747-200, actually, the most prized jewel of American military aviation. Its name is National Emergency Airborne Command Post (NEACP), commonly known as the Doomsday Plane due to its role as a command base in national emergency situations or nuclear war. If Air Force One is often described as being a kind of flying White House, the Doomsday Plane is sort of duplicate Pentagon. Equipped with electronic gear worthy of a science fiction movie, it is even hardened against the electromagnetic impulse from nuclear explosions. If we go back to the official version, we remember how this stressed that Washington’s airspace was completely defenceless at the time of flight 77’s appearance. Now we discover that things weren’t quite like that. Why was the Doomsday Plane patrolling the area that day? And, especially, why do they wish to hide at all costs the fact that it was there? What top-secret military operation was it carrying out?
• Laten we eens naar de passagiers van AA77 kijken...
  Usually the list of passengers of an airline flight is quite heterogeneous. However, on the passenger list of flight 77 we discover an unusual assembly of individuals who were, in some way or other, connected with the American military system. In two or three cases these connections are downright disconcerting.26 Let us start with the captain of the flight, Charles F. Burlingame, 51, who wasn’t just an average pilot. He had a brilliant military career, which culminated with a medal for his service in the Gulf War; he had been a real Top Gun of American aviation. He was still in touch with the Pentagon, which he considered “hallowed ground”.27 His co-pilot, David Charlebois, 39, was a member of the National Gay Pilots Association, and his father had been a U.S. Foreign Service Officer.28 Wilson Flagg, 63, former military pilot and retiring admiral, had compromised his carrier in 1991 due to a sex harassment scandal.
  John Yamnicky, 71, an aircraft engineer for the Veridian Corporation, had also been a military aviator. He crash-landed five times and survived each time; he no longer had the same fortune, though, on the 11th of September. He spent thirty years in the Navy, working mostly on top-secret projects.30 Brian Jack, 48, was a mathematician who had worked at the Pentagon for twenty-three years; apparently in an office located in that precise wing of the building the airplane he was travelling in crashed into.31 Bernard Brown, 11, was the victim of an unbelievable fate.
  The boy was aboard flight 77 which crashed exactly into the area of the building where his father’s office was located; his father was a naval officer. The reason his father didn’t die in that tragic crash was because he had just gotten permission for a day off and didn’t go to work. Otherwise he would have also been killed by the airplane in which his son was travelling.32 William E. Caswell, 54, was a senior scientist working for the U.S. Navy. He was involved in top-secret projects, so much so that not even his family knew what exactly he was doing.33 Stanley Hall, 68, a retired army officer, worked in the war industry, at Raytheon, and he was an expert in electronic warfare and antiradar technology.
  Charles Droz, 52, had spent 20 years in the Navy, where he worked at developing complex software.35 Chandler Raymond Keller, 29, and Ruben Ornedo, 39, were Boeing engineers, specialised in missile propulsion.36 Steven Jacoby, 43, was an expert in wireless communications.37 Dong Lee, 48, secret NSA agent and also scientist, was an expert in integrated defence systems for Boeing.38 Robert Ploger, 59, son of Major General Robert Ploger Sr., was a software programmer for Lockhead, a company which dealt with constructing military aircraft. Robert Penniger, 63, was an electronic systems engineer for BAE Systems, another company which operates within the warfare industry.
  John Sammartino, 37, had a long career as a technical manager for XonTech, a company which also operates within the warfare industry and which specializes in missiles. Previously he had worked for the Naval Research Laboratory in the Navy as well. Leonard Taylor, 44, was also a XonTech employee. Vickie Yancey, 43, former electronic specialist in the Navy, had worked as a Department of Defence Contractor for Vrenderburg Co.39 Barbara Olson, 45, writer and CNN commentator, was the wife of Theodore Olson, U.S. Solicitor General and lawyer of the Bush family. Of all the passengers, Olson was the only one who made phone calls.
• Dus alle passagiers op de half lege Boeing was dus personeel die banden hadden met het Pentagon, inclusief de piloten en stewards:
  Therefore, although half empty (judging by the passenger list which included only sixty-four people, including crew members, compared to the two hundred seats available), the airplane which supposedly crashed into the Pentagon was filled with individuals closely related to the American army. Theoretically, such oddity wouldn’t mean much: there may be a larger concentration of a certain category at any time within a group of people ― this is a matter of normal statistical fluctuation, just as when, at a game of roulette, the ball falls on red five or ten times in a row. And yet, if we add this to the other strange elements of the “Pentagon” story, we really cannot overlook the question: could it be that the anomalies concerning the passenger list lead us to the same cause? In other words, if there was no Boeing 757 which crashed into the Pentagon, and everything that we were told was false, then wouldn’t there be something odd about the passenger list of flight 77 as well? More so, when, upon examining their identities, we discover that so many of them are members or collaborators of the American military system.
• De gelijkenis met Operation Northwoods is frappant:
  Inevitably, we think back to Operation Northwoods, which we mentioned earlier ― the project designed by the CIA in the 60’s and then stopped by Kennedy ― which involved mounting a series of attacks on various American landmarks and then attributing these to Fidel Castro’s regime, as a pretext to invade Cuba. One of the key elements of this project was putting in place a series of imaginary victims. Therefore, taking into consideration everything we have said previously and connecting the dots, more and more incredible suspicions arise.
• Pentagon verschafte weinig informatie totdat het gedwongen werd (en nog meer toevalligheden):
  on the 15th of September 2006, as a result of a lawsuit brought by Judicialwatch, the American government was forced to make public the content of the video recorded by the surveillance camera from the petrol station near the Pentagon building. No airplane can be seen in this recording either.41 On the 2nd of December, also following a lawsuit, the government disclosed another recording, the one filmed by a camera located at the Doubletree Hotel. You’ve guessed, right? The explosion is quite visible, but there is no airplane in this film either.42 Three days after this recording was made public, the daughter of Charles Burlingame, the pilot (or, better said, the alleged pilot) of flight 77 which supposedly crashed into the Pentagon, died in a fire that started in her flat. At the moment of the tragedy she was with her former fiancé ― an Army veteran ― who, while trying to flee, pulled the door shut after him and accidentally locked the woman inside.43
• Laten we eens kijken naar het passagiersmanifest van AA11 (vliegtuig dat in de Noordtoeren crashte):
  AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 11 (the airplane which crashed into the first tower) Victims reported: 92 (source: CNN). The number of victims stated in the official list: 86 (source CNN). 92 – 86 = 6. Six people on the list are missing. Crew: John Ogonowski, Thomas McGuinness, Barbara Arestegui, Jeffrey Collman, Sara Low, Karen Martin, Kathleen Nicosia, Betty Ong, Jean Roger, Dianne Snyder, Madeline Sweeney. Passengers: Anna Williams Allison, David Angell, Lynn Angell, Seima Aoyama, Myra Aronson, Christine Barbuto, Berry Berenson, Carolyn Beug, Carol Bouchard, Robin Caplin, Neilie Casey, Jeffrey Coombs, Tara Creamer, Thelma Cuccinello, Patrick Currivan, Andrew Curry Green, Brian Dale, David DiMeglio, Donald Ditullio, Albert Dominguez, Alex Filipov, Carol Flyzik, Paul Friedman, Karleton D.B. Fyfe, Peter Gay, Linda George, Edmund Glazer, Lisa Fenn Gordenstein, Paige Farley Hackel, Peter Hashem, Robert Hayes, Ted Hennessy, John Hofer, Cora Holland, Nicholas Humber, John Jenkins, Charles Jones, Robin Kaplan, Barbara Keating, David Kovalcin, Judy Larocque, Jude Larson, Natalie Larson, N. Janis Lasden, Daniel John Lee, Daniel C. Lewin, Susan MacKay, Chris Mello, Jeff Mladenik, Antonio Montoya, Carlos Montoya, Laura Lee Morabito, Mildred Naiman, Laurie Neira, Renee Newell, Jacqueline Norton, Robert Norton, Jane Orth, Thomas Pecorelli, Sonia Morales Puopolo, David Retik, Philip Rosenzweig, Richard Ross, Jessica Sachs, Rahma Salie, Heather Smith, Douglas Stone, Xavier Suarez, Michael Theodoridis, James Trentini, Mary Trentini, Mary Wahlstrom, Kenneth Waldie, John Wenckus, Candace Lee Williams, Christopher Zarba (source: CNN). There is no Arab name on the list. None of the following five Arabs, identified as authors of the hijacking, were on the airline’s passenger list: 1. Satam M.A. Al Suqami 2. Waleed M. Alshehri 3. Wail M. Alshehri 4. Mohamed Atta 5. Abdul Aziz Al-Omari If the hijackers had passed through check-in, why did their names not appear on the company’s passenger list? Even so, supposing that the names of the Arabs were, for some reason, erased from the list, this still wouldn’t add up ― one person is missing. 86 people on the list + 5 terrorists = a total of 91 victims. The reported number of victims is 92. Who is the 92nd victim? Why doesn’t his or her name appear anywhere? Is this something normal? Does it happen often?
• Er stonden dus geen Arabieren op de lijst. En het aantal klopt niet. Volgende: UA175 (zuidtoren)
  UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT 175 (the airplane which crashed into the second tower) Victims reported: 65 (source: CNN). The number of victims stated in the official list: 56 (source: CNN). 65 – 56 = 9. Nine people are missing from the list. Crew: Victor Saracini, Michael Horrocks, Robert J. Fangman, Amy N. Jarret, Amy R. King, Kathryn L. Laborie, Alfred G. Marchand, Michael C. Tarrou, Alicia N. Titus. Passengers: Alona Avraham, Garnet «Ace» Bailey, Mark Bavis, Graham Berkeley, Touri Bolourchi, Klaus Bothe, Daniel Brandhorst, David Brandhorst, John Cahill, Christoffer Carstanjen, John Corcoran «Jay» Corcoran, Dorothy Dearaujo, Gloria Debarrera Lisa Frost, Ronald Gamboa, Lynn Goodchild, Francis E. Grogan, Carl Hammond, Peter Hanson, Susan Hanson, Christine Hanson, Gerald Hardacre, Eric Hartono, James E. Hayden, Herbert Homer, Robert Jalbert, Ralph Kershaw, Heinrich Kimmig, Brian Kinney, Robert LeBlanc, Maclovio «Joe» Lopez Jr., Marianne MacFarlane, Louis Neil Mariani, Juliana Valentine McCourt, Ruth McCourt, Wolfgang Menzel, Shawn Nassaney, Patrick Quigley, Frederick Rimmele, James M. Roux, Jesus Sanchez, Kathleen, Robert Shearer, Jane Simpkin, Brian D. Sweeney, Timothy Ward, William Weems (source: CNN). There is no Arab name on the list. None of the five Arabs identified as authors of this second hijacking were on the airline’s passenger list: 1. Marwan Al-Shehhi 2. Fayez Rashid Ahmed Hassan Al Qadi Banihammad 3. Ahmed Alghamdi 4. Hamza Alghamdi 5. Mohand Alshehri. If the hijackers had passed through check-in, why did their names not appear on the company’s passenger list? Even so, supposing that the names of the Arabs were, for some reason, erased from the list, it still wouldn’t add up ― four people are missing. 56 people on the list + 5 terrorists = a total of 61 victims. The reported number of victims is 65. Who are the four missing victims? Why can’t we find their names anywhere?
• Opnieuw hetzelfde probleem. Aa77 dan (Pentagon):
  AMERICAN AIRLINES FLIGHT 77 (the airplane which allegedly crashed into the Pentagon) Victims reported: 64 (source: CNN). The number of victims stated in the official list: 56 (source: CNN) 64 – 56 = 8. Eight people are missing from the list. Crew: Charles Burlingame, David Charlebois, Michele Heidenberge, Jennifer Lewis, Kenneth Lewis Renee May. Passengers: Paul Ambrose, Yeneneh Betru, M.J. Booth, Bernard Brown, Suzanne Calley, William Caswell, Sarah Clark, Asia Cottom, James Debeuneure, Rodney Dickens, Eddie Dillard, Charles Droz, Barbara Edwards, Charles S. Falkenberg, Zoe Falkenberg, Dana Falkenberg, Joe Ferguson, Wilson «Bud» Flagg, Dee Flagg, Richard Gabrie, Ian Gray, Stanley Hall, Bryan Jack, Steven D. «Jake» Jacoby, Ann Judge, Chandler Keller, Yvonne Kennedy, Norma Khan, Karen A. Kincaid, Norma Langsteuerle, Dong Lee, Dora Menchaca, Christopher Newton, Barbara Olson, Ruben Ornedo, Robert Penniger, Lisa Raines, Todd Reuben, John Sammartino, Diane Simmons, George Simmons, Mari-Rae Soppe, Bob Speisman, Hilda Taylor, Leonard Taylor, Leslie A. Whittington, John Yamnicky, Vicki Yancey, Shuyin Yang, Yuguag Zheng (source: CNN). There is no Arab name on the list. None of the following five Arabs, identified as authors of the Pentagon hijacking, were on the airline’s passenger list: 1. Khalid Almihdhar 2. Majed Moqed 3. Nawaf Alhazmi 4. Salem Alhazmi 5. Hani Hanjour. If the hijackers had passed through check-in, why did their names not appear on the company’s passenger list? Even so, supposing that the names of the Arabs were, for some reason, erased from the list, this still wouldn’t add up ― three people are missing. 56 people on the list + 5 terrorists = a total of 61 victims. The reported number of victims is 64. Who are the three missing victims? Why can’t we find their names anywhere? Is this something normal? Does it happen often?48
• Weer dus hetzelfde probleem. Ten slote UA93 (Pennsylvania):
  UNITED AIRLINES FLIGHT 93 (the airplane that crashed in Pennsylvania) Victims reported: 45 (source: CNN). The number of victims stated in the official list: 33 (source: CNN) 45 – 33 = 12. Twelve people are missing from the list. Crew: Jason Dahl, Leroy Homer, Lorraine Bay, Sandra Bradshaw, Wanda Green, CeeCee Lyles, Deborah.
  Passengers: Christian Adams, Todd Beamer, Alan Beaven, Mark Bingham, Deora Bodley, Marion Britton, Thomas E. Burnett Jr., William Cashman, Georgine Corrigan, Joseph Deluca, Patrick Driscoll, Edward Felt, Colleen Fraser, Andrew Garcia, Jeremy Glick, Lauren Grandcolas, Donald F. Green, Linda Gronlund, Richard Guadagno, Toshiya Kuge, Waleska Martinez, Nicole Miller, Mark Rothenberg, Christine Snyder, John Talignani, Honor Wainio (source: CNN). There is no Arab name on the list. None of the four Arabs, identified as authors of the hijacking, were on the airline’s passenger list: 1. Saeed Alghamdi 2. Ahmed Ibrahim A. Al Haznawi 3. Ahmed Alnami 4. Ziad Samir Jarrah. If the hijackers had passed through check-in, why did their names not appear on the company’s passenger list? Even so, supposing that the names of the Arabs were, for some reason, erased from the list, this still wouldn’t add up ― eight people are missing. 33 people on the list + 4 terrorists = a total of 37 victims. The reported number of victims is 45. Who are the eight missing victims? Why can’t we find their names anywhere? Is this something normal? Does it happen often?49 In these instances, the same irregularity has happened four times in a row!
• Dus dezeflde onregelmatigheden vier keer op een rij met alle betrokken viertuigen? Toeval? Uiteindelijk ontbreken er 37 passagiers (266 slachtoffers maar enkel 229 op de lijsten bron: cnn). Er waren 19 Arabieren. Zelfs als we ze meetellen ontbreken er nog altijd 18 mensen. Waar zijn die naartoe?
  According to the official version the total number of victims who were passengers aboard the four airplanes is 266. However, the passenger lists made public by the airline companies and quoted by CNN comprise a total number of 229 people. Thirty-seven are nowhere to be found, and it seems they died without being aboard, if we are to believe the information from the passenger lists provided by the airline companies, usually very accurate. Among those thirty-seven are also the nineteen Arabs who hijacked the airplanes. As a matter of fact it is amazing that, although there are people of various nationalities on those lists, no Arab names ever appear. In other words, even if we were to consider the nineteen Arab terrorists among the victims ― although their names do not appear on the passenger lists ― we would still have eighteen mysterious victims, a fact which everyone seems to ignore.
• Even een detour: Michael Moore: controlled opposition
  The suspicion that these massacres were “helped” to occur, with the final purpose of strengthening the public opinion’s disapproval of civilians’ right to carry firearms, grew among conspiracists; as it is an inconceivable freedom for any power axis that aims to establish an authoritarian system of government. How could you establish an enduring police state if the citizens collectively own many more firearms than the armed forces? Reversing this situation could be the outcome, hoped for or otherwise, of Michael Moore’s Bowling to Columbine. In conclusion, it is quite suspicious, to say the least, that in his Oscar winning film the “transgressive” Moore doesn’t mention any of the conspiracy theories that the Columbine High School events have generated or the various inaccuracies of this case.
  We are slowly beginning to understand why he won the Oscar. The second question that must be asked about this case is the following: why did the mass media pay such attention to Michael Moore, so much so that they made an international celebrity of him? The mass media tend to forget talking about issues that are uncomfortable for those in power, but in Moore’s case they obviously made an exception. Why?
  Moore was on the crest of the wave after the anti-Bush show on the night of the Academy Awards ceremony, and turned out to be perfectly prompt, flooding the market with his book Stupid White Man, sold in millions of copies and strengthening his celebrity status ― something which ensured worldwide coverage at the moment his shocking 2004 film about the September 11 was released; that very Fahrenheit 9/11 which should have awoken the Americans from the sleep of their reason, revealing authentic images from behind the scenes of the attacks. Fahrenheit 9/11 turned out to be a documentary ― undoubtedly very well done ― about the business relationships between Bush and bin Laden, in other words two of the least likely people to be involved in the 9/11 events. You didn’t believe, by any chance, that September 11, 2001 could have come from the mind of a comic character such as George W. Bush or of the sinister and sickly caveman, Osama, did you? Moore’s film is dead silent on almost all the incongruities of the official version of the 9/11 events. With his film Michael Moore generated the utmost level of opposition that the American mass media were willing to promote in 2004. Could this have only been due to Moore’s wisdom and pragmatism, or did someone suggest or impose these limits? The fact is that this so-called opposition could be described as a lot of smoke and no fire, something which became obvious with the rapid downfall of the Moore phenomenon. We were all really excited at first, but around 2007 we realized that the essence was quite different ― hidden truths, much more disturbing than what Moore had promised.6 Nevertheless, are we sure that everything that glisters is gold? Or have we simply gone up to a superior level of fake opposition? Hmm….
• Terug naar 9/11: het instorten van de torens. Het officiële verhaal - in zoverre er één is - blijkt ronduit bizar:
  Officially, the Towers collapsed because of the infernal furnace generated by the burning fuel from the tanks of the kamikaze airplanes. Although, a month after the events, the prestigious magazine Scientific American published an article which maintained that the causes for the collapse of the Twin Towers were still impossible to explain, despite all speculations.5 But the official version went for the simpler explanation, so the main cause that brought about the collapse of the Towers was and is considered to date to be the fire started by the kamikaze airliners. Though, we must point out that steel ― unless some supernatural force intervenes ― melts at 1,500°C6; therefore, the prestigious BBC network didn’t appear in a very good light when, two days after the events, it stated that steel melts at 800°C. The article can still be read on the internet, and is available for those who wish to collect famous oddities.
  Steel columns do not transform so easily into chocolate bars. At 550°C, steel can still preserve 60% of its resistance capacity. However, skyscrapers are designed to withhold a load equal to five times their own weight; therefore, if the steel had reached the temperature of 550°C, the building would have still been able to put up with the pressure of a load three times its own weight. What is more, it is very unlikely for petrol to have heated steel to 500°C. Steel is an alloy that conducts heat well: thus if on the one hand the furnace heated the metal, on the other hand the whole environment and the cold parts of the steel would have absorbed heat, lowering the temperature around the critical area. Steel not only couldn’t have melted, but it couldn’t have gotten very hot either.
  Very well. Now that we have done a little recap at physics, let us see what sort of wreckage the firefighters found at the site in the first days after the attacks: molten steel.8 How come? It means that those who say kerosene cannot melt steel are wrong!
  We cannot know exactly what temperatures were reached at the same time at the base of the Towers, but we can very well imagine, given that, deep within the earth, that furnace continued to smoulder for three months, and impressive amounts of molten steel were discovered afterwards. And here is how we have come to discover the new and miraculous properties of kerosene! Kerosene not only melts steel, and steel situated hundreds of metres away from the burning point, but it manages to melt that steel found farther away much better ― in fact the hottest areas were located in the groundwork of the Towers. That being said, I advise you to be very cautious if you see a car on fire a few hundred metres from your car: that car could not only melt completely and what remains of it entirely evaporate without leaving any traces behind (as in the case of the Pentagon airplane), but it is quite possible that your innocent little car, which is hundreds of metres away of the fire, might suddenly melt under you, since kerosene, petrol and diesel oil do not really differ so much. Do you believe I am exaggerating? No, I am not the one who is exaggerating, kerosene is. Do you know what the kerosene from the tanks of the hijacked airplanes was also capable of on September 11? It seems it also melted the groundwork of World Trade Center 7, the other building which collapsed on the evening of September 11 without anyone being able to explain the exact cause. Molten steel was discovered under the ruins of this third tower as well. What could have heated the substructure of Tower 7 to 1,500°C if not our infamous kerosene?
• Anderhalve maand voor 9/11 rapporteert mainstream publicatie Forbes een bijzondere gebeurtenis in de Twin Towers:
  Also Forbes recounted a strange incident that occurred about a month and a half before September 11. All the tenants occupying the 98th floor, the one above his office, had been evacuated in order to carry out some works the witness had been convinced were renovation works due to the deafening sounds he could hear ― probably of pneumatic hammers. The uproar was so powerful ― Forbes stressed ― that the floor of his office was shaking. From time to time, unusual thuds could be heard as if very heavy objects were being thrown directly on the floor above, and everything around was vibrating. Curious, our man decided to go upstairs when it was relatively quiet, and see what kind of repair works they were doing. He discovered aghast that the whole floor was completely empty but in perfect order, and there was no sign of any renovation works being carried out. William Rodriguez, who received a medal of honour as a hero of September 11, confessed that a similar incident happened on the 34th floor.19 Ben Fountain, a financial analyst, mentions many instances of people being evacuated from the Twin Towers in the weeks preceding the September 11 events. Daria Coard, a security guard at WTC, confessed that on the 6th of September, only a few days before the Towers collapsed, all the bomb detection dogs had been removed from the premises.20 I wonder why? The cherry on top of the cake: Securacom, the company that was providing security services for the WTC, had Marvin Bush on its board of directors, none other than George W. Bush’s brother.
• Spine studie weerlegt stelling dat enkel de zwaartekracht verantwoordelijk is voor de instorting:
  In a study made by an independent association of American scientists and engineers ― Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven (SPINE)26 - there is a scientific analysis of the 9/11 events in which they calculate with remarkable precision the magnitude of the forces involved at the moment the buildings collapsed, and reach the conclusion that gravitational energy alone couldn’t have caused the collapse the way it actually happened.27 The scientific precision of the SPINE study is important, but it is an analysis of the events made using very specialized terminology, difficult to understand by common people such as ourselves. We would just need some palpable evidence, easy to recognize as such, something anyone could judge by simply using his common sense.
• Seismische data zijn ook verhelderend:
  On September 11, at the time the Twin Towers disaster took place, the seismographs from the Lamont-Doherty Institute of Columbia University in Palisades ― around thirty kilometres north of the World Trade Center in New York ― registered unusual seismic activity. As you can see from Photo 17, the impact of the airplanes with the Towers had a visible, yet minimal effect on the earth’s crust. However, when the Towers collapsed, a very strange, almost inexplicable phenomenon took place: in the first phase ― when the Towers began collapsing, the seismograph recorded a very powerful jolt, producing a spike twenty times higher than the seismic wave generated by the Towers’ subsequent fall to the ground. If I am not misinterpreting the data, this means that at the beginning of the collapse, there was something which released an amount of energy twenty times stronger than the one released subsequently by the impact of the falling Towers (weighing a million and a half tons) with the ground. Very strange. Very strange, indeed.
  There are no official explanations for this phenomenon. No seismologist has managed to explain how that spike was produced such a long time before the actual impact with the ground. And what a strange spike: sharp and of very short duration! According to Thorne Lay, a seismologist at the University of California, this is how an underground nuclear explosion appears on a seismograph.
  Therefore the assumption that two mega-explosions within their foundation helped the Towers collapse is quite logical. If that was what really happened, then the mystery of the thousand tons of molten steel discovered at their base could finally be explained otherwise than by invoking the supernatural.
• Dat de zuidtoren instortte voor de noordtoren is ook al verdacht (in mijn ogen is dit punt in feite cruciaal - de zuidtoren KON niet eerder instorten, dat is fysisch gewoon niet mogelijk):
  For instance, at the beginning, the fact that the tower that was hit last fell first raised a great deal of suspicion. The first skyscraper was hit right in the centre, while the second one was nearly missed by the airplane, which collided with it close to one of the edges. The official explanation for what happened was that, because it was damaged on one of the sides, the second tower was more affected than the first one, therefore collapsing before it. Now, I don’t know how you feel about logic, but to my humble eyes the assertion seems totally surrealistic. If you remember, the official explanation for the collapse of the Towers is that the structure of the buildings gave out as a result of the heat from the burning fuel of the airplanes, not from the impact with the two airliners. Everyone seems to agree with the fact that the impact alone couldn’t have caused the collapse of the Towers. In this case, don’t you think it seems a little surrealistic that, in the case of the South Tower’s collapse, we are served at the same time two antithetical answers, according to the question you ask? It can get worse, though: the load-bearing structure of the buildings was placed right in the centre, therefore by crashing into the second tower towards the edge the airplane couldn’t have damaged the steel core to a greater degree than what had happened in the case of the first tower. If you need another argument, it is enough to take a look at the seismogram recorded during the two events: the second impact generated a much weaker oscillation (it is barely visible) than the one in the case of the first airplane, which points to the fact that the interaction with the steel core was minimal. We still have the fire, right? Could it be that the fire which started in the second tower was more intense that the one in the first tower, thus precipitating its collapse? Frankly, it is very unlikely for such a thing to have happened, even if we want to call forth the magical properties of third millennium petrol.
  The fact is that, in the case of the second skyscraper, the conservation of angular momentum of the airplane with its load, after the impact, led to a great deal of fuel exploding outside the building, sideways, generating a cloud of fire ― very efficient as a Hollywood type effect, but disastrous from a military standpoint.
  And since what burns outside cannot, at the same time, burn inside the building ― not even modern fuel can achieve that ― the rapid collapse of the second skyscraper becomes a totally inexplicable mystery; that, of course, if we take into consideration the laws of physics, not to speak of those of logic. Why did the least damaged tower collapse less than an hour after the impact, while the other building, whose structure was more severely affected, was left standing for almost double that time ― an hour and three-quarters? If you think this question is strange, wait until you hear the next one. The question marks become even more striking if we accept the version in which the Towers were deliberately demolished. Therefore, why demolish first the tower that: 1) was hit last and 2) was damaged the least? I can just see the Poirot in you suddenly lifting his head, puzzled by this whole mystery and beginning to twirl his neat and stiff moustache. Hmm… mumble, mumble…
  According to the script, it is quite likely that the first tower to be hit should be the first to be brought down. Therefore, what sudden and dramatic change came about, so that the assassin diverted from his rigorously devised plan? What was it that forced him to improvise, skipping one of the fundamental sequences of his scenario, and to risk being exposed and seeing his plans ruined? Of one thing we can be certain: if the assassin changed his plans on the spot, that means he had no choice. And our next question is the following: What was happening in the second tower that was so dramatic and alarming the assassin had to demolish it before its time?
  Brian Clark is one of the few survivors from WTC 2, who was at a floor above the point of impact with the airplane; to be more exact, he was at the 84th floor (also hit by one of the wings). Here is what he says in one of the interviews made by the BBC:31 “Our room fell apart at that moment. Complete destruction. For seven to ten seconds there was this enormous sway in the building and it was all one way and I just felt in my heart that ― oh my gosh ― we’re going over.” However, the second tower was less damaged than the first one where all the stairs had been destroyed; in the second tower, out of three stairways, one was left standing. And Brian Clark decides to go down. “So we started down that stairway and we only went three floors. There was a group of seven of us, myself and six others. We met two people that had come up from the floor 80, a heavy set woman and, by comparison, a rather frail male. She said stop, stop, you’ve got to go up and she laboured up to join us moving very slowly, she was such a big woman. She said you’ve got to go, you’ve got to go up, you can’t go down, there’s too much smoke and flame below.” Then, Clark hears someone crying for help from a nearby office. The person calling was a banker, Stanley Praimnath. Clark pulls him from under the debris and together they start descending, but they are hindered by the fireproof drywall that was meant to protect them. “Drywall had been blown off the wall […] and we had to move it, shovel it aside. You could see through the wall and the cracks and see flames just, just licking up, not a roaring inferno, just quiet flames licking up and smoke sort of eking through the wall.” In the same BBC interview, Matthys Levy, a structural engineer, declares: “It was very much like a controlled demolition when you look at it because the building essentially fell almost vertically down as if someone had deliberately set blasts to take place to cause the building to fall vertically downward.”
  Another firefighter, Louie Cacchioli, with twenty years of experience in the field and having been decorated afterwards for his acts during the rescue operations, declares: “We were the first ones in the second tower after the plane struck. I was taking firefighters up in the elevator to the 24th floor to get in position to evacuate workers. On the last trip up a bomb went off. We think there was bombs set in the building.”
  The second airplane didn’t hit WTC 2 with enough precision. The one responsible for the special effects should be fired. In such an important production we cannot afford for a stunt to fail!
  The heroic firefighters were courageously climbing the stairwell of the buildings filled with people desperately searching for a way out of that inferno. Sooner or later they were going to reach the place of impact. When the second airplane collided with the South Tower, it created a breach that spread between the 78th floor and the 84th floor. Allegedly, in that area the towering inferno, capable of weakening the steel beams of the tower’s structure, exceeded any human power of imagination, growing ever more and consuming in its flames people, furniture and even the structure of the building itself. But the murderer knew this was only a tactical myth meant to cover up what was in reality happening; the truth was different, a truth about which mass media were conveniently quiet. The simple truth was that, after the kerosene had burnt in a matter of minutes, the fire nearly extinguished itself and, after almost three quarters of an hour from the collision, there weren’t many things inside the building that could feed the fire further. Therefore the murderer found himself in the situation of watching with growing restlessness how the firefighters were getting closer, one floor after the other, to the nonexistent towering inferno ― the guise without which the impending collapse of the buildings would have lost its role as mimetic diversion; in other words, the essential mystifying mask would have fallen off.
  At 9.43 a.m. firefighters reach the 69th floor and the tower has only 16 minutes to go until its impending doom. So do the firefighters. For more than a year no one was to find out anything about what had happened inside the Towers during those last minutes. The recordings of the last radio transmissions between the firefighters were kept secret. Then, in November 2002 The New York Times publishes a series of fragments.39 Most parts of the recordings remains secret, but even with the help of these bits of conversation made public we can establish a few guidelines, if not a few clear reference points. At 9.48 a.m. the firefighters are only four storeys away from the point of impact and eleven minutes away from their own tragic end. From the radio transmissions we understand they met many wounded people on their way. Between 9.52 and 9.56 a.m. the first firefighters reach the 78th floor, the Pillars of Hercules beyond which a real hell on earth is about to disintegrate the first of two of the most impressive and well-built structures in the world. Strangely enough, in their conversations the firefighters never mention such a hell. On the contrary, in their exchange they only mention isolated fires that shouldn’t be hard to extinguish.
  At 9.57 a.m. the firefighters are at the 79th floor but they give no sign of starting to roast because of the heat. And yet the towering inferno should have started right about there. Even so, tower and firefighters had only two minutes left to live. The killer understands he can stall no longer. He has no other way. He must hasten the collapse of the second tower, thereby preventing the firefighters from extinguishing the last fires and spreading the information that the problem is solved. At 9.59.04 a.m. two minutes after the firefighters got to the alleged infernal furnace, the South Tower of the World Trade Center suddenly collapses, though it had given no sign that could anticipate such an event. It is reasonable to hypothesize that if the firefighters had reached the 79th floor later, then the tower’s collapse might have also been delayed. Therefore, just as in Hollywood’s most Machiavellian productions, the arrival at the 79th floor practically set off the detonating mechanism that killed them, along with the other men and women who were still inside the buildings. A tragic and incredible appointment with death: it was literally waiting around the corner to slaughter them the moment they set foot in that illusive inferno which only existed in the words of television anchormen.
• De zuidtoren moest dus eerst instorten anders was het bedrog uitgekomen. Wat deed de torens instorten? Een nucleair wapen:
  Of course the first suspicion of some nuclear event at Ground Zero should have arisen by asking oneself a very simple question: why has that place been called Ground Zero? Do you actually know what “ground zero” in fact means? The Longman Advanced American Dictionary, edition of year 200045, tells us: ground zero: n (U) The place where a NUCLEAR bomb explodes, where the most severe damage occurs. Wow! So that’s the only meaning of the expression ground zero. The world NUCLEAR is even written in capital letters. Why was the place where the Towers collapsed called so, if it hadn’t anything to do with a nuclear explosion? Ground zero is actually a technical expression for a very specific event, so why would someone use it to describe a completely different occurrence?
  Difficult question, probably impossible to get a convincing answer and so the meaning of that expression has been re-written. So now the same Longman Advanced American Dictionary, edition of year 200746, tells us: ground zero: n (U) 1. The place where a large bomb explodes, where the most severe damage happens 2. Ground Zero: the place in New York City where the World Trade Center buildings were destroyed by TERRORISTS on September 11, 2001. Suddenly ground zero seems to have completely changed its meaning. It’s not any more a place where a nuclear explosion happens, now the term defines just a place where the explosion of a large bomb happens. The only word which deserved capital letters in the first edition was “NUCLEAR”, while in the second edition it’s “TERRORISTS”. It looks as if there is no expression any more to define a place where a nuclear explosion occurs. And Ground Zero with capital letters means the place where the WTC collapsed on that day. Other dictionaries in fact still keep also in their post-2001 editions the meaning of the place where a nuclear explosion occurs, but they all widen the meaning of this expression, to include also non-nuclear events47. Before 9/11, all dictionaries were referring only to the nuclear event.
  But reality is rarely black or white ― it often consists in shades of grey. It’s a big mistake to expect to hear the whole and definitive truth from a single source. That’s a mistake our mind learnt to make in ancient times when it was listening to and entirely believing (or entirely distrusting) the words of oracles. Khalezov’s statements should eventually be a starting point for further analysis, not a package which you must believe in or not. After all, disinformation is pursued by intentionally polluting an inconvenient truth with some implants of lunacy so that you reject the whole package. One of Khalezov’s bizarre statements is that thermate, a substance which many nowadays consider to be quite important in our case, doesn’t actually even exist. By the way, have you ever heard about thermate? Or at least about thermite?
• Of termiet? Steven Jones dacht van wel, maar dat werd hem niet in dank afgekomen (de cancellation-cultuur begint niet bij woke hoor)
  As a result of his publishing that article, Professor Steven Jones was forced by the University to go into early retirement. As a matter of fact many of the researchers who endorsed his theory are either retired or about to go into retirement.
  The picture is as clear as day. Few scientists are willing to give up their career for the sake of this truth.
• En wat zeiden de officiële experten van NIST?
  NIST members were asked if samples of molten steel were taken and examined for the purpose of identifying traces of explosives or thermite residues. After all, hundreds of witnesses stated that various explosions took place inside the buildings. “NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.” was the response.54 As a matter of fact, NIST didn’t even consider the hypothesis of controlled demolition, even if only to refute it. Anyway, the fact is that they simply ignored everything that didn’t correspond with the theory they were about to make official. Therefore we are witnessing “science” as practised many centuries ago, in the era of magic.
  NIST not only ignored the statements of a lot of identified witnesses, but it never took into consideration any of the FEMA reports in which, among other things, we can read: “Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. […] The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulphur has been identified.”
  When you have twenty million dollars at your disposal, shouldn’t you spend a few hundred dollars on repeating the FEMA analysis, solving thus “the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation”? No, when you have twenty million dollars, this is not really the case. Especially since the signs (described in black and white by FEMA) are exactly those that thermite would leave.
• Dan toch termiet?
  On September 11 at 9.52 a.m. a TV camera records a very clear image on the 80th floor of the South Tower: a white, intense light, followed by white smoke and an orange-coloured molten metal splashing out of the windows. All of these signs reveal the use of thermite. The white smoke should be aluminium oxide. Various eye witnesses declare they have seen similar phenomena taking place in other parts of the Towers as well. The fact that we are not dealing with an isolated event is emphasized by the hundreds of automobiles, parked in the vicinity of the Towers, which were damaged in ways almost impossible to explain otherwise: half molten, half intact cars, vehicles that were almost intact, but had their bonnet and engine liquefied.59 In other words, such a surreal scenario that some went as far as to assume they used laser beams from outer space. Undoubtedly a thermite shower is a more reasonable explanation.
  In June 2009 a statement came by Britain’s prestigious Institute of Nanotechnology, according to which the Harrit study “provides indisputable evidence that a highly engineered explosive called nano-thermite was found in the dust of all three buildings that came down on 9/11 2001 in New York city. [sic] This advanced explosive incorporating nanotechnology is only available to sophisticated military labs.”62 But then, once again, history has been rewritten and the information disappeared from the Institute’s website, replaced by a declaration of their own sudden incompetence in judging a scientific peer reviewed publication in their own field of expertise. Do you remember what we have said earlier about the Law of the Dumb Scientist?
• Waarom moest gebouw 7 neergehaald worden (een van de mysteries trouwens van 9/11: alle gebouwen behorende tot het complex werden die dag geheel of gedeeltelijk verwoest terwijl andere gebouwen in de omgeving die dichter stonden bij de Twin Towers dan de gebouwen van het complex, weinig of geen schade hadden - geen enkele van die gebouwen is ingestort.)
  Apart from that bunker, WTC 7 also housed a CIA headquarters and stored many important documents, in the originals, of the most serious financial scandals of the times such as Enron and WorldCom. The Enron fraud alone amounted to seventy billion dollars forever stolen from gullible investors. Once WTC 7 collapsed… PUFF! Everything magically disappeared. Later on, Cliff Baxter, one of the main people accused in the Enron scandal, was to “commit suicide”, something which completed the case’s fall into oblivion.
  And one more reason, perhaps the most important one: on September 11, WTC 7 was indeed used as a base, but not one meant to manage the crisis. It was rather the headquarters of the conspirators. The whole operation which culminated with the Twin Towers’ controlled demolition would have been carried out from the bunker inside WTC 7. And the building’s collapse successfully ended the operation by forever burying the evidence with it.
• Welke rol speelde Larry Silverstein?
  When Silverstein bought the lease on the Towers this bit of business looked like the worst deal of the century. Few people know that the Twin Towers were considered an architectural dinosaur and that they should have been demolished long before. The main problem was that the Towers were filled with asbestos, a highly carcinogenic material; therefore controlled demolition had been banned on public health grounds. The Towers should have been demolished one story at a time and the costs would have been astronomical, thus untenable.66 The Towers not only became an albatross, a relic that couldn’t be buried, but their maintenance was also very expensive. At least two hundred million dollars needed to be invested in renovation works alone. The Towers had become completely inadequate for modern needs and an increasing number of companies had given up renting office space there.
  In these circumstances anyone with an ounce of common sense would never have thought of buying them. No one except our lucky naïve businessman. Silverstein paid one hundred and twenty-two million dollars in advance for the Towers, the rest of the amount to be paid in instalments over the course of a century. One hundred years of mortgage! Really optimistic from a seventy year old man, at the time of that transaction. When, a few weeks later ― how extraordinary, right? ― the Towers collapsed, Silverstein sued the insurance companies claiming there hadn’t been only one terrorist attack but two events and therefore he demanded twice the policy limit.
  Anyway, it seems his point of view was accepted ― even if only in part ― by the judges, who decreed that a compensation of four billion six hundred million dollars be paid to him.
  Let us recap: in July you invest one hundred twenty-two million dollars (this sum probably borrowed from banks) and you become indebted for the next hundred years just to buy something no one wants. Two months later, those one hundred and twenty million dollars “casually” turn into four billion six hundred million dollars. A profit of 3700% is not bad these days, especially as regards the magnitude of the figures.
  Therefore those twenty-two insurance companies involved in the transaction were going to lose all that money. But were they? Not a chance, since they had also acquired reinsurance policies from the German colossus Münchener Rück and from Swiss Re, who have the unenviable honour of paying for the broken piece.67 No problem: these companies can always raise the price of the insurance policies of other clients. This means that in the end we are all giving Silverstein the money to rebuild his towers for free.
  In conclusion we can definitely say that Silverstein was born under a lucky star. The insurance policy explicitly gave him the right to rebuild the complex in case it got destroyed. Because who would have imagined, right, that such a group of buildings would one day be wiped off the face of the earth by an unprecedented terrorist attack?
• Noteer dat VRTNWS niets van dit alles wil hebben. Arme Larry is volgens onze openbare omroep gewoon het slachtoffer van het gezeik van complotdenkers en niets van wat hierboven staat, betekent ook maar iets. Het is blijkbaar de gewoonte van de door ons betaalde zender om miljardairs graag de hand boven het hoofd te houden (zelfs 22 jaar na datum). Op naar de volgende ongerijmdheid dan maar: hoe is WTC7 ingestort? Onze Larry wist het ons te vertellen, maar het was voor onze journalisten geen verder onderzoek waard:
  How come? The official version of WTC 7’s collapse was that the causes for the tragic event were unknown! But all of a sudden the owner himself confesses the building was actually demolished! And yet, during all those years that have passed since that public statement, no one ― no investigator or journalist ― has taken the trouble to make further inquiries and ask Silverstein for more explanations about that peculiar aspect. How is that possible? Wasn’t America the country of aggressive journalism? Where are all the Pulitzer Prize aspirants? To tell the whole truth we must mention there were a few who thought of doing this but Silverstein explained them to that he wasn’t talking about the tower in the interview, but about a firefighter… Not even the most loyal adept of the official version can avoid certain vexing questions.
  For instance: why does the official version, despite Silverstein’s statement, maintain that WTC 7’s collapse was caused by unknown factors? The answer to our next question may implicitly suggest an answer to our first one: how could they have organized the controlled demolition of a skyscraper that size (and by this we mean detecting the perfect places to set the explosive, placing them etc) in a matter of hours?
• Terug naar de demolition dan maar, pardon, het toevallig instorten als gevolg van de zwaartekracht:
  On the 15th of July, 2001 two gigantic towers had been destroyed by controlled demolition. Yes, you have heard well, I haven’t mistaken the date. Two towers went to pieces in mid-July of 2001, less than two months before the September 11 events. They were known as the Maspeth Holders and were two one-hundred-metre high buildings, designed to store gas.70 An extremely unusual demolition and quite peculiar since there were no short term plans to exploit that land and use it for other purposes. Anyway, it is a very beautiful coincidence: when has a pair of towers ever been demolished simultaneously? Practically, never. Except on those two dates: on the 15th of July and on the 11th of September, 2001. Bizarrely close in time, not to say suspiciously. The demolition of the Maspeth Holders was carried out by Controlled Demolitions Inc. Look at what a coincidence! Controlled Demolitions Inc. is the same company that a few months later was going to receive the contract to remove the debris from the World Trade Center. Incidentally, a few years earlier Controlled Demolitions Inc. had received a contract for similar services following the Oklahoma City attack (another perfect inside job). Couldn’t this company, Controlled Demolitions Inc., also have won the big prize at the lottery? In the case of the World Trade Center the contract for the area’s rehabilitation was worth around seven billion dollars.71 Given the circumstances, a general rehearsal held two months before the final event might have turned out useful.
  Though there is a shadow of a doubt… Could such spectacular general rehearsals have made sense for a simple land rehabilitation work that involved clearing even an immense amount of debris? Wouldn’t it have made much more sense if it had been a general rehearsal for demolishing two other gigantic towers? In August 2006, being asked by the government for a report on the Towers’ collapse and having great difficulties in finding a reason other than controlled demolition in the case of WTC 7’s collapse, NIST tried to wash their hands of this, commissioning a few companies in the field to investigate the hypothesis according to which the event was caused by explosives. And one of these companies is… ― guess what? ― Controlled Demolitions Inc.! In 2016 Larry Silverstein declared in public that his project to rebuild WTC had been prepared already in... April 2000.
• Hoe men via editing de illusie creëert:
  What would you like to talk about? Are editing techniques all right? As Eisenstein perceived almost a hundred years ago, in cinematography editing is essential for telling a good story. Editing is also very useful when certain details of a scene have to be hidden from the audience, details that could compromise the credibility of the tale. Have you noticed there isn’t any footage of the Towers collapsing that doesn’t change its viewpoints during those couple of seconds? All those films have been edited; which is perfectly normal, since we are dealing with fiction here. Oh, if only we could watch a straight recording, one that didn’t change its viewpoints…
• Het gedrag van Mohammed Attah die dag roept ook wel wat vragen op, maar geen belangrijke hoor MSM:
  But the beautiful part comes with the two Perfect Terrorist Suitcases Mohamed Atta took with him on his last journey and which were conveniently left at the airport after check-in, due to some sort of technical problems (there is an alternative version of this story according to which the suitcases were discovered in one of the luggage warehouses of the airport, a sign that the writers of this film’s script weren’t in complete agreement). Atta had arrived at the airport driving a rental car, found afterwards and immediately recognized as one of the terrorists’ cars because obviously Atta had forgotten an object inside which led the investigators to him. His were the only two suitcases which remained on the ground and were later found; the luggage of all the other passengers had made it inside the airplane. The suitcases contained a typical (or, rather, improbable) amateur terrorist kit: a flight manual for Boeing 757 and 767 airplanes, two videotapes relating to “air tours” of the Boeing aircraft, a copy of the Koran, his passport, driver’s licence, audio cassettes with prayers, notes on how to psychologically prepare the other terrorists for the action and martyrdom, the clothes to wear in heaven, his will, in fact exactly what you need to be identified as a terrorist while, at the same time, to reveal the nature of the attack you are planning. We are overcome with a sheer sublime feeling when we try to imagine what Atta could possibly have done on board with the Boeing flight manuals and especially with those videotapes.
  Are these the kind of things you would carry around with you to the airport if you were about to hijack an airplane with the purpose of embarking on a suicide mission, risking that even a simple traffic hold-up or the airport police compromise your whole plan and instead of the paradise of martyrs you end up in jail? Obviously, yes. When you are about to hijack an airliner in an important suicide mission, you absolutely need to carry with you in your bag all the evidence that points to your intentions, just out of curiosity to see if anyone discovers anything at baggage check and arrest you, ruining everything.
  Another question that comes to mind is ― what could a terrorist about to go on a suicide mission, such as Mohamed Atta, do with a hundred thousand dollars (remember this amount was sent to him by an official of the Pakistani intelligence services only ten days before September 11)? What could he have done with so much money in the otherworld? And yet, are we absolutely certain he knew he was about to die that day? A few years after the events, The New York Times published the news of a huge scandal: an official of the U.S. Department of Defense had confessed that he had received orders to destroy all the documents which pointed to Atta (who had been targeted ever since 1999) as being a terrorist.10 But Atta isn’t the only kamikaze terrorist who carefully left as many traces as possible that could establish he was responsible for the attack. Marwan al-Shehhi left his rental car in the parking of the airport in Boston, “forgetting” inside a flight manual in Arabic, notes containing the names of all the other terrorists and the address of the flight school where he had taken a few flying lessons.11
• En Atta was dus niet de enige:
  What is more, terrorist Nawaf Alhazmi’s car was found at Dulles airport, containing an excellent letter with advice from Atta, a receipt for the payment of some courses at a flight school, four drawings of the cockpit of a Boeing 757 jet and a box-cutter type knife similar to those allegedly used by the terrorists to hijack the airliners.12 A few hours before, terrorist Marwan Al-Shehhi also left another box-cutter type knife in his hotel room and the now customary flight manual for a Boeing 757 aircraft.13 The other terrorists left similar traces everywhere, while Ziad Jarrah turned out so zealous that he built an unlikely replica cockpit inside his house. What could he have possibly done with it? Play Snoopy vs. the Red Baron in the evenings?14 But Jarrah doesn’t stop here: he writes to his girlfriend in Germany a farewell letter in which he fully explains the reasons for what he was about to do, but he manages to send it to the wrong address, so the letter somehow ends up in the hands of the FBI.
• En de dagen voordien was het al niet veel anders:
  The icing on the cake: during the days prior to the attack the pious Muslims destined for martyrdom partied in nightclubs, tippling alcoholic drinks and conveniently forgetting a copy of the Koran. Every good Muslim obviously must bring it with him when he goes to get drunk in some bar.15
  There is also the case of another Arab whose name appeared on the lists of dead attackers, Ameer Bukhari, who died for sure, but in 1999, as the American authorities also subsequently admitted.
  This is the reason why I won’t dwell, unlike others, on the biographies of those nineteen Arabs who probably were not even on the airplanes. If the Arabs had a part to play in this story, it wasn’t that of flying airplanes they couldn’t even master ― which is what totally takes away any trace of interest in the story of their lives; lives that, as a matter of fact, have been meticulously reconstructed by very active independent journalists on the internet.18 If those individuals had anything to do with this story they could only have played the same part Lee Oswald, the scapegoat in the case of President Kennedy’s assassination, played.
  In other words, we must take into consideration another hypothesis: during the period immediately preceding the attacks some of the alleged dead and resurrected terrorists reported the theft or disappearance of their personal documents; as you might suspect, this doesn’t simplify things at all, but suggests that all the incriminating evidence that pointed to them might have come from certain impostors. The testimonies which were gathered form the flight schools that some of the so-called terrorists actually went to, support this theory. Two of them, Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi spoke German and French respectively, given that they had lived for a while in Europe. Despite this, they turned out to be totally ignorant when someone tried to speak to them in one of the languages they were supposed to know; instead of answering they frowned and walked away.19 It even seems that Atta, the most famous of them, the one who received one hundred thousand dollars from the Pakistani intelligence services, worked in Hamburg at some point within an exclusive government project of cooperation between Germany and the U.S., operated by a lesser known private organization which was closely connected to important and powerful persons such as David Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger.20 Let us remember that the latter was called to lead the government commission of investigation on the September 11 events, a position which he wisely and quickly turned down.
  However, it seems that the oddities relating to Atta continue even in his physical absence. Thus, although they didn’t know him personally, it seems his neighbours had problems with the FBI who strongly advised them not to talk to anyone about him. Why was that? What could those people who never knew Atta possibly disclose about him? Besides, Atta’s father, a respectable Egyptian lawyer, swears his son telephoned him from Germany a few days after the September 11 events ― therefore, after his alleged death ― and that he has never received any news from him ever since. Perhaps he is lying. And yet, why should he?
• Als je dacht van het verhaal van de "moslims" vreemd was, hebben we ook nog Ted en Barbara Olson:
  It doesn’t seem as though Ted Olson, Barbara’s husband, has ever been interviewed by the CNN ― the TV channel for which his wife worked ― or any other American mass media. On the 12th of December, 2001 he spoke at a rally in memory of the victims, but never mentioned his own wife. Then, after being dead silent for a few months, he gave an interview to Toby Harnden, a reporter for the London Telegraph. The interview was published on the 5th of March, 2002 and syndicated by other publications worldwide (for example, in The West Australian, on the 23rd of March, 2002) but never by an American journal, which is something stranger than everything else, right? Could it be that's because this interview blows everything to pieces? Ted Olson claims that his wife used one of the telephones on the aircraft, calling him reverse charge. It seems that from a technical standpoint such a call is impossible. According to the American Airlines bureau in London, the company’s Boeing 757 aircrafts aren’t equipped with telephones for passengers.
  Since these phone calls were like the media axis around which the idea that the airplanes were hijacked by Arab terrorists revolved and from which it was propagated, the situation becomes even more interesting the moment we discover such a glaring inaccuracy. Police Lieutenant Columbo would probably exult.
  Finally, I will point to a very strange coincidence: not only are some of the main characters of this story casually involved with the Bush family (Bad Osama, for instance, is the “black sheep” of the Bin Ladens, which for a very long time had close business relationships with the Bush family), but so are some of the extras: Barbara Olson ― the most important witness of the airplanes being hijacked by Arab terrorists ― is the wife of one of Bush’s solicitors and the author of a scandalous book about the previous president.
• En daarmee zijn we bij de telefoons aangekomen. Zie je: mensen op de vliegtuigen hadden contact genomen met hun geliefden...
  The longest phone call made using a cell phone was officially attributed to Todd Beamer. It seems he was the one who mentioned the passenger’s intention to rebel against their attackers, preferring a heroic death. This conversation seemingly lasted about a quarter of an hour and took place between Beamer and a person he didn’t know personally, Lisa Jefferson, a Customer service employee at Verizon (a telecommunications company). But according to Dewdney’s experiments, this phone call, as well as all the others, couldn’t have taken place.
  And the experts in mobile phone communications seem to fully agree with this conclusion.
  In the summer of 2004 the magazine New Scientist published the news that in the future using cell phones on airplanes will be possible, also describing the technical procedure involved in this. Implicitly the article suggests this was not possible before. 33 As a matter of fact, American Airlines made the first test flight during which passengers could use their cell phones only in July 2004.34 Other bizarre aspects ― not to call them downright absurd ― come from other telephone conversations mentioned by the official version; for instance the conversation between Mark Bingham and his mother begins by Bingham saying: “I am Mark Bingham”. Now, I ask you: when you call your mother, do you also introduce yourself like that, using your full name?35 Realising his blunder, our “Mark Bingham” would ask his mother twice during their conversation if she believed what he was saying.
• Was het allemaal maar een film?
  Although we know things didn’t happen the way they are recounted, we cannot help being moved when we are told about the passengers’ heroic attempt to overpower the terrorists, a motif we find in most American films. In the country with the highest rate of obesity, on the same airplane hijacked by some fanatical Muslims, a veritable galaxy of athletes, some of America’s most powerful symbols of health and sports, happens to be found: the former rugby player Mark Bingham, the former judo champion Jeremy Glick, the huge New Zealand rock climber Alan Beaven, the weight lifter Lou Nacke (who had a tattoo of Superman on his shoulder), the enforcement officer Rick Guadagno, who was also an expert in hand-to-hand combat, William Cashman, a former paratrooper, Linda Gronlund, a lawyer who also had a brown belt in karate and, finally, Todd Beamer, a former basketball player. Beamer was the one who gave the signal for the passengers’ heroic uprising with his historic (and cinematic) line: Let’s roll! They are the heroes America will never forget, fallen in the line of duty while they were preventing the terrorists from killing other hundreds of innocents. This is the film that will forever stick in our minds, even if none of us has ever seen it.38 But they have told us this story so masterfully and so many times that sooner or later there will be someone who will start believing that he actually saw it.
• De hit op de zuidtoren? Was het een vliegtuig?
  The first article had a sequel and, therefore, controversy ensued. In order to find out the truth, a few scientists from a Spanish university (Escola Universitària Politècnica di Mataró) were given the task of analysing the images on a computer and establishing the nature of that “reflection”. The result of the study is very clear: it is not a reflection but a three-dimensional, long and slender object. As you can see for yourself, the shape of the object is similar to that of a missile.12 Contacted by the Spanish, the management of the Boeing company with its headquarter in Seattle agreed to collaborate with the press and solve the mystery, but after a few days they refused to give any further information “for reasons of national security”.
  In all the four takes in which there is a clear view of the collision you can see in close shot without the shadow of a doubt how, just when the airplane hits the South Tower, an intense flash is released. Unlike in the amateur footage of the first impact, in this case doubts aren’t justified. It is an explosion, no doubt about it. Let us see now if you can guess where the explosion appears? You won’t believe it. The explosion occurs at the tip of the mysterious object shaped like a missile!14 Let us recap: the alleged Boeing 767 which hit the South Tower of the WTC was shot before the collision by many cameramen and photographers from different perspectives and angles; in most cases on the underside of the fuselage a long aerodynamic object, similar to a missile, is visible. The representatives of the aircraft factory refuse to give any information regarding this phenomenon for reasons of national security, as if it were really a missile there. The moment the long, aerodynamic object comes into contact with the building, it produces a bright light similar to that of an explosion, exactly like in the case of a missile… I bet no one will be surprised to find out that in fact that was really a missile! (see Photo 39)
  In reality the information according to which the airplane that collided, live and on television worldwide, with the South Tower wasn’t an airliner doesn’t come as news. On the contrary. This was aired almost immediately by Mark Burnback, a reporter for Fox News, who was relatively close to the place of the attack. A few minutes after the explosion, Burnback clearly stated that the airplane couldn’t have been a commercial plane because it didn’t have any windows. There were other witnesses who claimed on the spot that it hadn’t been a civilian aircraft. All of these statements were transmitted by Fox News only once, on the morning of September 11, never to be rerun again despite the repetitive way in which news is presented on TV. In his film, 911 in Plane Site, Dave vonKleist gathered all these testimonies, otherwise destined to pass into oblivion.
  Well, this is the first oddity: the total number of passengers aboard the four airplanes represented only 30% of the number of available seats. Usually airplanes won’t fly 70% unoccupied. It is very unlikely for all the four coast-to-coast flights to have been so empty. Of course theoretically anything is possible but we cannot overlook this abnormality.
  The second oddity: as we have seen earlier there are some serious indications that the aircrafts which collided with the WTC skyscrapers weren’t the airliners we were officially told about, but some others, very different. If this is true, as it seems to be, then the whole sequence of events must be revised. The third oddity: the pilots of all the four airplanes shut their transponders down immediately after the hijacking operation began. This detail is rather strange, given that shutting down the transponder is not enough to make the aircraft undetectable by radar. That device gives air traffic controllers data regarding the name of the airline company, the number of the flight, the speed, the altitude, latitude and longitude of the airplane. The last two, latitude and longitude, can also be detected by radar; consequently, by shutting down the transponder we cannot avoid being tracked with precision. Then why shut it down? Because this way the aircraft cannot be identified. And not only that. Its altitude can no longer be detected from the ground. But why? Why this sudden need of discretion about some aspects that couldn’t have possibly interfered with the success of the mission, even if air traffic controllers knew about them or not? And thus, there we have it, another question worth asking, hoping that others will spring from this and that our magnifying glass will see them. Right, for the moment I’ll tell you that some of these flights were said to have disappeared momentarily and inexplicably from the average radars.17 However, it is important to mention that we are talking about civilian radars. There are also military radar systems that may be superior in performance, but we have no information about what data these might have recorded on September 11.
• De ongebruikelijke syncronie van de vier vliegtuigen:
  Let us continue. Aha! Here is another weird aspect, and this time you can truly say we are dealing with something bizarre. All of the four hijackings happened in unusual synchrony. Let us remember the protagonists of these scenes and reveal the harmonious way in which they coordinated their actions: Flight 11 ― the first airplane to hit; target: WTC 1; time of impact: 8.46 Flight 175 ― the second airplane to hit; target: WTC 2; time of impact: 9.02 Flight 77 ― the third airplane to hit; target: the Pentagon; time of impact: 9.37 Flight 93 ― the airplane that will crash in Pennsylvania, at 10.06 Here are the main events for every flight: AA FLIGHT 11 Boston-Los Angeles Boeing 767 81 passengers, 11 crew members Take off at 7.59 (instead of 7.45 as scheduled) First deviated from its scheduled path at 8.16 Deactivating the transponder at 8.20 Impact with WTC 1 at 8.46 UA FLIGHT 175 Boston-Los Angeles Boeing 767 56 passengers, 9 crew members Take off at 8.14 (instead of 7.58 as scheduled) First deviated from its scheduled path at 8.42 Deactivating the transponder at 8.46 Impact with WTC 2 at 9.02 AA FLIGHT 77 Dulles (Washington)-Los Angeles Boeing 757 58 passengers, 6 crew members Take off at 8.20 (instead of 8.10 as scheduled) First deviated from its scheduled path at 8.46 The second time it deviated from its path at 8.54-9.08 Deactivating the transponder at 9.09 The (alleged) impact with the Pentagon at 9.37 UA FLIGHT 93 Newark (NY)-San Francisco Boeing 757 38 passengers, 7 crew members Take off at 8.42 (instead of 8.01 as scheduled) First deviated from its scheduled path at 9.36 Deactivating the transponder at 9.40 Crashed in Pennsylvania at 10.06 Except for the time the first airplane took off and the time the last one crashed, all the other events overlap in an impressive chronological sequence.
  Flight 11 deviates from its scheduled path at 8.16, only two minutes after flight 175’s take off, and its transponder is disconnected at 8.20, precisely when flight 77 takes off. Flight 11 crashed into the WTC at 8.46, exactly when the transponder of flight 175 is deactivated and flight 77 deviates from its path! So, there we have it, we are dealing here with a triple coincidence. Let us go on: flight 93 takes off forty-one minutes late but at the same time flight 175 deviates from its scheduled route one minute before flight 77 allegedly collided with the Pentagon. I’ll stop here so as not to become boring, but if you like you can amuse yourself by proceeding with the whole analysis of this chronological sequence. The events unfolded in an unusually elegant and captivating way ― supposing this really was a casual sequence of circumstances. If we were dealing with a deliberate synchrony, it cannot possibly be attributed to a bunch of fanatical Arabs who hijack airplanes with box-cutting knives and who have never flown a Boeing (remember they were considered unable to fly even a simple Cessna); it is hard to believe these individuals were capable of complying with such a precise and strict schedule. Let us emphasize the fact that the terrorists couldn’t have communicated from one airplane to the other; in conclusion, synchronizing their actions on the spot was impossible, unless of course they had telepathic abilities. Although judging by the way events developed, such a possibility shouldn’t be entirely excluded; after all, Arab terrorists were capable of skilfully manoeuvring gigantic airplanes, guiding them towards their targets without knowing how to fly, which might suggest that in the absence of piloting abilities they must undoubtedly have had telekinetic abilities; so why not attribute to them a healthy dose of telepathy too?
  Or should we perhaps believe that the transponders were telepathic and that someone remotely disconnected them by using mind control… and maybe with the help of some convenient electromagnetic impulses, right? The fact that all the airplanes took off with delays of different duration places a tombstone over the hypothesis of any prior synchronization between the attackers. We are still stuck though with the hypothesis of an incredible chain of coincidences.
  That is to say, why did the organizers of the attacks need to be so awfully accurate? The answer may be very simple: that is how real military operations are carried out. But it might be that this precision wasn’t the fruit of the natural inclination towards rigour that military men have. It might be that this exactness was vital for the success of the plot. Remember this is not the only abnormality we are unable to find an explanation for. We still have the oddity of the 70% empty airplanes. We still have the mystery of the transponders deactivated without any apparent reason, a mystery which deepens because every time a transponder is shut down, another key-moment of the whole operation happens.
  The good airplanes took off and were on their various ways when a master puppeteer, hidden God knows where ― perhaps even at the NORAD headquarters ― contacted the pilots and told them: “This is NORAD, a State of National Emergency has been declared! We are being attacked by terrorists! Deactivate your transponders! Deactivate radio communication. Here is your new flight schedule: you will land at the Yeager military base.” In fact we aren’t sure that was the actual location but, since civilian flights used to land at Yeager as well, the consecutive arrivals of some large airliners wouldn’t have stirred too much curiosity among the people who lived nearby. It was very important for our fellow subjects not to suspect anything, otherwise they would have all asked for an audience with the king. Therefore the transponders were shut down and the good airplanes, although still visible on the radars, lost their identity for the air traffic controllers who were watching them from their towers. Once the transponders were deactivated, most of the magic was dispelled. The good airplanes didn’t even have names, or a well-established altitude, or any other distinctive characteristic. The wizard had transformed them to a few undefined bright spots that were moving within the crystal ball of the radar, fading away from time to time, only to reappear later on.
  In the meantime the evil airplanes didn’t sit around with their arms folded. Two of them took off and stealthily caught up with the good ones, going on the same route but at a different altitude so that their trajectories coincided on the radar. Later on, when their paths separated, the replacement was already made. Just as in good spy films, the fake airplane followed the real one while the real one was redirected somewhere else and grounded. To further confuse the air controllers, the evil wizard in the high castle had performed another magic, which many would call “war game” or “terrorist drill”
• Het leek dus op een militaire drill....hey wat toevallig...er waren enkele militaire drills aan de gang diezelfde ochtend:
  This magic would, among other things, populate the monitors of the air controllers with the traces of nonexistent planes. As a matter of fact, several military drills were running on September 11, some of them simulating a scenario very similar to the one which actually then really happened.18
  few minutes later, Pseudo-flight 11 carried out its mission by colliding very precisely with the North Tower. Pseudo-flight 175 arrived a few minutes later on the scene and collided with the second tower, though the precision of the blow wasn’t as accurate given that such a large Boeing is harder to manoeuvre from afar even for the skilful wizards who were remote-controlling them with their magic wands. Yet what happened to the airplanes that were as good as gold and with all their passengers aboard? They all landed on the flight strip of the same military base. Here, all the passengers and members of the crew were embarked on flight 93. There was room for everyone, since “by chance” all the four flights had been 70% empty. And there we have it ― flight 93 began its last and tragic one-way journey. A particularly cruel and deadly magic made flight 93 explode over Pennsylvania and all the witnesses to the little incident ― alas ― disappeared as if by magic. Their remains were gathered by military personnel on the ground so that no one realized they had found more arms and legs that they should have.
  The person who put together this innocent little story, telling how things may have unfolded on the morning of September 11, might not have calculated the length of the time intervals within which the airplanes moved, to prove first and foremost if this sequence of events was possible from a logistic standpoint. As a matter of fact, it seems the intervals and the distances prove that the mechanics of the events, as described earlier, is quite likely in the case of all the airplanes except for flight 93, which ended tragically in Pennsylvania. Consequently the theory was revised by Leonard Spencer19; he supposed that a fourth duplicate airplane existed, which replaced the real flight 93. What is more, the airplane that targeted the Pentagon wasn’t what it seemed either. Spencer noticed another strange coincidence: by adding up all the crew members of the four airplanes and the nineteen alleged terrorists, we get exactly forty-five people ― in other words the exact number of people officially deceased as a result of flight 93’s crash. This is a detail which pushes us to advance the incredible and diabolical version according to which, on September 11, only crew members died because in fact there were no passengers aboard. In other words, everything would have been a simple set-up, including the pain of the relatives of the alleged victims. The hypothesis is absurd, but it logically derives from the statement that crew members and terrorists make up the exact number of people killed in the crash of flight 93. On the other hand, nothing stops us from believing this is yet another false lead which only aims at deepening the mystery. After all, there were no real terrorists on board of those planes, were they? Therefore the “exact number” would cease to be exact any more.
• En zo zijn we gekomen bij het onwaarschijnlijke verhaal van Vlucht 93 (later ook verfilmd):
  At 11.43 a.m. on September 11, 2001 the television channel WCPO TV Channel 9 from Cincinnati, Ohio, mentioned a bomb threat and the emergency landing of United Airlines flight 93. According to the official version the airplane crashed at 10.06 a.m. Yet on the WCPO TV Channel 9 site the following news appeared, published at 11.43 and attributed to Liz Foreman: “A Boeing 767 out of Boston made an emergency landing Tuesday at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport due to concerns that it may have a bomb aboard, said Mayor Michael R. White. White said the plane had been moved to a secure area of the airport and was evacuated. United identified the plane as Flight 93.
  An interesting detail regarding this news is that it remained on the site for a couple of years without anyone noticing and bringing it to the public’s attention. A simple search on Archive.org reveals that in August 2003 the news could still be read online.21 But it was immediately deleted once it came into the limelight and was replaced by a brief notice: “This story has been removed from WCPO.com. It was a preliminary AP story, and was factually incorrect.” Crystal clear, right? It follows that flight 93 has two simultaneous destinations. In one case it is grounded due to a bomb threat and evacuated, after which its trace disappears completely. In the second, the airplane crashes as a result of the virtuous and heroic reaction of the passengers or ― if you wish ― it is shot down in Pennsylvania.
  On the 20th of June, 2003 the German television channel WRD aired the documentary Aktenzeichen 11.9 ungelöst (“The 9.11 Case ― unsolved”) by Willy Brunner and Gerhard Wisnewski.22 This was the first time that a television channel aired a straightforward investigation on this subject. Audience ratings doubled compared with the usual share. The authors focused especially on flight 93, which up to that moment had attracted less attention from the investigators than the other flights. They went to Pennsylvania where they interviewed eye witnesses. These revealed a whole different picture, as usual, from the official one. In brief: just as in the case of the Boeing that hit the Pentagon, there was no wreckage that could allow clear identification of this airplane either. Only tiny scraps, no longer than a few centimetres. If, for the Pentagon event, they created the myth of the airplane being completely absorbed through the tiny breach made by the collision with the building’s façade (a theory which many people tend to believe even today), the alleged airplane which supposedly crashed on a field in Pennsylvania disappeared completely inside the hole made by the impact. Therefore an aircraft weighing one hundred and fifty tons, filled with forty-five people, having two hundred seats, luggage inside, wings forty metres wide, totally disappeared within the depths of a hole no larger than nine metres by five, and only a couple of metres deep.
  In light of the senselessness of this scenario, let us direct our attention towards the other destiny of this airplane ― in which it is the protagonist of the Cleveland Hopkins airport Mystery. On the morning of September 11, at 10 o’clock, Cleveland Hopkins airport is suddenly evacuated. All the employees, the passengers and the people who were accompanying them are driven away, forbidden even to take their own cars from the airport’s parking lot; they have to walk out. Not even the buses are allowed out. Flight 93 isn’t the only one which performs an emergency landing. That would have been much too simple. Associated Press announces that a Delta Airlines aircraft ― flight 189 ― landed on one of the strips at Cleveland Hopkins. There is a certain degree of confusion as to the identity of the airplanes and the times they landed. Delta Airlines confirms that the company’s airliner landed at 10.10 a.m., information later confirmed by the firefighters as well. Let us consider this information as being true. Those almost-seventy passengers were evacuated after two hours and taken inside an FFA building for questioning. As for flight 93, it supposedly landed at 10.45 a.m. At 11.00 o’clock a.m. the mayor of Cleveland, Michael White, organizes a press conference where he states among other things that the airplane which just landed has two hundred passengers aboard. Therefore we could assume he was talking about flight 93, given that the other one only had seventy passengers. In this case we have a problem. We know that officially flight 93 only had thirty-eight passengers aboard. Where could the other one hundred and sixty-two have sprung from? By chance could they have been “borrowed” from the other flights “hijacked” that morning?
  Those passengers were evacuated in only half an hour (as opposed to two hours in the case of the other airplane) and transported ― according to the reconstruction ― to a building nearby which belonged to NASA. After that, their track was simply lost forever…25 If you are thinking that all you have to do is interview the man who was then the mayor of Cleveland in order to solve the mystery, then I recommend you from the very beginning to quit. He has long declared himself “out of the business of interviews” ― news black-out. Let us find comfort therefore in the Hollywood fantasy film United 93 made in 2006...
• Wat het allemaal een hologram? De technologie bestond & werd gebruikt door het leger:.
  It looks like this assumption isn’t so irrational: a holographic projector for war purposes seems to have existed for at least ten years and the army of the United States has it. You can also find a data sheet for an airborne version of such an object, on a military site. 
  An article published on the 31st of March, 1997 in Defense Weekly bears the following title: Offensive Info War. Among the various computer programmes the article mentions there is one relating to extremely convincing three-dimensional holographic projections for use in war zones or anywhere in the world where there is the need to organize psychological impact operations (PsyOps). One of the possibilities suggested by the article is extremely fascinating, that of inducing the appearance of God-like creatures in places where these can have a disconcerting effect.8 In other words, could it be technically possible that the airplanes we have all seen colliding with the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001 didn’t exist in reality, and that we were really dealing with the world première of the projections of a holographic movie transmitted live? Personally I don’t believe such a thing, and yet I find it interesting to enter into the details of this theory for a few minutes, given that it is so original and fantastic.
  According to LEDO, UA Flight 175 impacted with the South Tower at 9:02:54, while according to FAA it impacted at 9:03:11. There are 17 seconds of difference.12 The seismic observatory recorded the impact 17 seconds before the Aviation Agency did. The 9/11 Commission chose the FAA record to define the official time. This could perhaps suggest to you which of the two was lying. So now a question arises and becomes legitimate and in a way mandatory: Did something special happen in those 17 seconds, and if yes, what and why?
  Surprisingly, the five rival TV networks appear to be interconnected in the immediate aftermath of a completely unexpected event ― the first “hijacked plane’s” strike at 8:46AM. Just a couple of minutes after the first strike they are all often sharing identical images in real-time, as if all were in fact mixed in a single TV studio and the networks were not rivals any more, competing at being the first to give exclusive information. But then, exactly 17 seconds before the crash (according to the official FAA time), something odd happens. A total audio dropout on ABC live broadcast and a loud beep-beep. That’s exactly at the very moment when “the plane” should have crashed into the tower according to the seismic observatory data. That’s a weird coincidence! But of course this must be only a coincidence, else we would have probably noticed something strange also on the live broadcasts of the other TV networks.
  Incidentally, that’s precisely what may have happened. Exactly 17 seconds before impact also on the other networks the audio of the live broadcast seem to show little unique anomalies. On CBS it’s allegedly an audio glitch. On FOX a little audio surge. On CNN a little snap. These anomalies are not easy to track. But if they happened, what are the probabilities of audio “problems” occurring perfectly synchronised between four TV networks in the very same moment the plane should have crashed into the tower according to the seismic observatory?
  We’ve got seventeen seconds which may have been swallowed by history ― if we chose to trust the data of the seismic observatory, and at the same time multiple synchronised audio anomalies which seem to happen during the live TV broadcasts which are there to establish the standard of historical reality, and those just at the beginning of those mysterious 17 seconds. But what does that mean? It looks like a clue, but a clue for what?
  The camera filming from a helicopter of FOX News, Chopper 5, is framing the scene with a wide angle focal length, large portions of the New York sky behind the Towers are visible and no plane approaching is to be seen in the sky. Suddenly, nine seconds before the impact, the camera sharply zooms onto the Towers, as if the operator knew in advance what was about to come. It perfectly frames the Towers just a few seconds before impact. But then, three second before impact, the explosion already happens on CBS, though we can see only the upper part of the fireball because of bad framing. For the previous ten minutes images aired on all TV networks were perfectly synchronised, which is obvious since it was live. You may check this yourself by aligning the clips for a parallel watch (there is already a clip on Youtube where the broadcasts of the four main networks have been aligned, supposedly in a correct way15). But now suddenly one of the networks is showing three seconds in advance what for the other cameras has still to happen! During a live broadcast!
  Are you still sure reality was still streaming live, at that point? To top it all, the NBC scene is also slightly out of synchro, and the fireball extinguishes a little bit earlier than in the ABC shot. Are you still sure reality was still streaming live, at that point?
  While on CBS the explosion begins, on ABC the black silhouette of the plane is entering the frame and a few moments later crashes into the tower, but at that moment another odd coincidence occurs: both the Fox News Chopper 5 video as well the video on CNN (a feed coming from a different camera) fade into black for a moment. These were the only video feeds where the impact was to be seen live, since the others managed to capture only the fireball. And they faded into black for some moments (15 frames on the Chopper 5 video) exactly during the crucial event! ABC showing the same feed of CNN didn’t fade into black, but a banner was partially hiding the area of impact… What are the probabilities of such an odd broadcasting accident happening twice in two different professional studios with two different video feeds at the very same moment during such an important event? Before the fade into black, the Fox News Chopper 5 video confronts us with another oddity, one that perhaps we were not supposed to see.
  What you can watch with your eyes before the fade into black is… the nose of the plane emerging apparently intact on the other side of the tower. Just for a few frames. And then… there comes the fade into black!
  Shack analysed the pixels of the nose of the plane before it enters into the tower and after it emerges on the other side20, and came to the conclusion that the pixels are very similar. But the aluminium nose of a Boeing is very fragile, so how on earth could it ever emerge undamaged on the other side of the tower where the whole plane has just exploded? Well, the razor of Occam’s logic suggests that if the pixels which entered the tower could be similar to the pixels that exit the tower, while the nose of the plane which exits the tower couldn’t possibly be the same unmodified nose of the plane that entered it, then perhaps we should start considering the possibility that what we have seen in reality was nothing else than… pixels.
• Maar wat dan met al die amateur videobeelden?
  The thesis advanced by Simon Shack is that everything we saw on TV on that day had been previously prepared using digital animation techniques. Those special effects were actually of very poor quality, but this would obviously be explained by the level of secrecy of the entire operation, which wouldn’t allow the hiring of the best Hollywood professionals for this job. A moment before the explosion happened, probably caused by a fast missile with wings (there is some footage where something that looks far more like a missile than a plane is to be seen), the live coverage would cease, substituted by the buffered footage of the last 17 seconds before “impact”. During the transition, on one network the audio would have been dropped and a synchronisation beep-beep went live, possibly by mistake. In due time, the silhouette of the approaching plane would be superimposed, but due to a slight lateral gliding of the camera point of view from the helicopter, the superimposition went badly wrong and the nose of the “plane” popped up undamaged on the other side of the tower. Within the time-span of human reaction, someone frantically would have pushed fade-to-black buttons to avoid further possible damage. When six minutes later CNN had to show that view of the impact of the second plane, it did so while a big superimposed banner screaming “BREAKING NEWS” made it completely impossible to actually see anything at all. A very, very unlikely mistake. Think about that! You are CNN and you have the footage of the event of the century, which happened just six minutes earlier, and you mess up everything by showing it in a way that can’t be seen, and then fail to correct the mistake in the following minutes. Didn’t they even notice they actually didn’t show the event? How plausible does all this sound to your ears? Later many “amateur videos” would appear, and Shack claims they are all badly manufactured. Some of these videos look incompatible one with another ― in some clips the plane is diving during its last seconds while in other it’s flying straight. And some of the initial videos would also be edited and changed. If you believe it wouldn’t be possible to fake the videos we’ve all seen, you may want to learn how to fake one of the most famous of those videos yourself with an easy and simple tutorial that can be found on Youtube. To see is to believe.21 But it’s of little use going into all these visual details inside a book made of words ― people who are interested should look for the videos on the internet and judge for themselves.22 Some could object that there are witnesses who saw the plane arriving. That’s true, but there weren’t after all so many witnesses, and strangely most of them were so lucky to be able to witness by telephone , having seen the planes right there during the live broadcast.
  Also people were later caught on camera who declared that there had been no planes, only explosions. Which of the two groups of witnesses could have a motive for lying? Someone also said they saw a missile. A Boeing flying low at over 800 km per hour (official speed) must make a huge unmistakable noise, but strangely is seems most of the people didn’t hear that noise at all. Nor was it apparently recorded in any of the famous clips of the impact. The only noise we can sometimes hear sounds more like a door slamming at the moment of impact, but after years of Hollywood films full of improbable artificial sounds we are programmed not to notice such little details…
  The smoking gun which allowed the digital animation to be exposed as such is the footage taken by Chopper 5 of Fox News, which was broadcast live and where the “Pinocchio’s nose” of the plane can be seen emerging intact on the opposite side of the tower after the “impact”. So it must not be a surprise to discover that this sequence has now disappeared from Fox News’s archives, replaced by an edited version where different viewpoints are used. But how can we be sure that what we are shown now is not the original broadcast? Well, because the audio track is still the same, and while it’s consistent with the purged footage, it is not with the edited version.23 From within his grave, Orwell must be yelling by now - My God, if you absolutely have to rewrite history, at least do it well!
• Dat wat betreft de video's. Wat nu met de doden?
  At the same time, research into records about the deaths of the victims according to the US Social Security Death Index revealed that most of the people who died on 9/11 seem not to have died at all.  You can verify this yourself. Out of 2,970 9/11 victims listed, only 446 appear in the Social Security Death Index. Of those 446, only 249 have a confirmed death certificate on file.
  Even though this all sounds completely crazy, you must admit it’s a very rational scenario. Once you’ve decided that you need a new Pearl Harbour to empower you to pursue your geopolitical goals, why on earth should you kill for real 3,000 of your own citizens when you know that the representation of their death will be more than enough? The devil is in the details – this is how truth eventually emerges – but people don’t look so much into details and even when they face them most likely they’ll shut their eyes whenever the details are disturbing. Who, then, would be all the relatives of the victims of 9/11 shown on TV now and then, either mourning their “deceased dear ones” or protesting against the government?
  Actors, most likely. The show must be convincing. If you watch with a critical eye commemorative documentaries on the topic you may notice how many of the subjects interviewed who “suffered a loss on 9/11” are in reality acting, always sighing and sobbing at the right moment, always in identical ways, which in the real word is totally unnatural. Years later, someone even recognized one of the “crisis actors” who was interviewed on 9/11 in New York when he was again interviewed as a witness to another crisis (the LAX shooting). The video is on Youtube for everyone to compare.
  Paradoxically, from a humanitarian point of view this further deception is even good news, because it means that 9/11 produced far less victims than previously thought. Truly the highest possible emotional impact on the world’s public with the lowest possible death toll. Of course many thousands died in the aftermath because of the dust and the toxic exhalations of the WTC ruins, as well as the hundreds of thousands or even millions from the consequences of the wars to come, but those are other stories.
  Later in this book I’ll mention Ellen Mariani, one of the most best known family members of a victim—her husband being Luis Neil Mariani. She became famous for her protests against the government. Now someone has found out that her deceased husband (who according to the US Social Security Death Index does not really seem to have died in New York on 9/11) closely resembles a very popular Spanish singer of the past who happens to have almost his same name, Luis Mariano. You may look at their pictures yourself and draw your own conclusions.
• Maar was er dan een operationeel centrum dat alles aanstuurde? Wel ja, en het staat nu bekend onder de naam....Cambridge Analytica (wat is de wereld klein hé!)
  Unless the networks were themselves fooled by a centralised broadcast of the video from a government controlled Opcentre—a facility for strategic communications—where all technical trickeries could be arranged. But what would such an “Opcentre” actually be? The answer is revealed to us by Strategic Communication Laboratories26, an UK company few people know about. “A strategic communication centre [Opcentre] puts influence, control and power back into the hands of the government and military. It is an essential component for Homeland Security, Conflict Reduction, International Public Diplomacy and un-mediated Government communications. Over the last 15 years the military use of Psyop has saved thousands of lives on both sides of military conflicts. In the future, conflicts may well be resolved on the global media stage, so that direct action becomes an unnecessary tactic,” it states (or it stated) on its website, in a quote provided by sourcewatch.com. And more: “Governments and Military forces worldwide are realising that communication can be a very powerful force. Those countries without the ability to control and respond to communications in a strategic capacity will be at a serious disadvantage in political and military terms. SCL is providing governments and military forces all over the world with the power to control their own communication messages and manage perceptions on the world media stage. Furthermore, it gives governments greater access to their own publics in time of crises and the military greater power to influence enemy disengagement in time of conflict,”
  An Opcentre would among other things be able to override all national radio and TV broadcasts in time of crisis, and provide the population with the fake scenarios that the situations would require. Was something like that eventually operative in USA on September 11, 2001?
• Nog andere mysteries:
  Yes, there are still huge unsolved mysteries in this whole 9/11 story, such as the over 1400 cars in the vicinity of the WTC (some, up to half a kilometre away) which were found partially toasted and sometimes even melted in irregular and inexplicable ways (plenty of photos exist on the web), an odd fact yet unexplained. And—no, the towers did not collapse on them, so the phenomenon was not caused by “the fuel from the planes” (which by the way had all already burned by then). And allegedly there are witnesses having seen people “engulfed in some sort of fireball” while running away from the collapsing Towers and then being eventually vaporized.
  Another witness, first responder EMT (Emergency Medical Technician) Patricia Ondrovic told about vehicles parked along the street which were spontaneously erupting into flames and exploding—the door of an exploding car hit her and injured her while she was running away from the first falling tower. Her clothes and hair started to burn as well. You are welcome to read her entire interview, which can be found online, recorded just a few weeks after the facts when memories are still fresh. Some of her statements however have been redacted, so the next question is: why would censorship of what she saw be necessary?
  Another EMT, Robert Ruiz, said in a similar interview: “Like things weren’t bad enough already, the car that’s parked right on that corner catches on fire. I don’t mean a little fire, the entire thing. Don’t ask me how. The entire car caught on fire. You would think maybe just a motor part or just the engine part. But this entire car just goes up in fire.” Like many others Ruiz told that the dust of the falling tower was unbearably hot. You can read his entire interview in the archive of the New York Times. If you want more stories, in the NY Times archive there are plenty of interviews.
  And we’ve mentioned earlier in this book the weird footage showing some core steel columns, which initially survived the collapse, which remain standing apparently undamaged for several seconds as high as the surrounding skyscrapers, and then for no apparent reason suddenly they appear to dissolve into fine dust which is blown away.
  Few people know that on September 11, 2001, a class three hurricane over the Atlantic arrived very close to New York. That was hurricane Erin, which first appeared on September 1st and for ten days then traveled upwards almost in a straight line towards New York City. On September 11 it came as close at 500 miles from NY but, perhaps a bit oddly, it was not reported or very marginally reported by some corporate news broadcasts in their weather forecast.28 On the next day it would suddenly change direction and head north-east. And even fewer people also know that, on the morning of September 11, magnetometers monitored by the University of Alaska recorded significant deviations from “background” or “normal” readings while the events of 9/11 were unfolding.
  PH values of the dust were extremely high, as high as caustic drain cleaner—it was reported over 12 on the PH scale inside the towers.42  Outside the towers, the alkalinity was lower. This suggests that something inside the towers calcined the concrete while it got pulverized, a process for which a lot more  energy is needed. How would you explain that without a powerful source of energy such as a nuclear explosion?
  As if this all were not enough, we should remember the cancer epidemic among First Responders, who worked on the rescue and recovery efforts at Ground Zero. Over 1000 First Responders were dead by year 2011. Among 40,000 First Responders the rate of Multiple Myeloma is 18 people per 100,000, a very high rate considering that the average is 3-9 cases per 100,000 people. However, in the general population just 1% of cases are under the age of 65, while most of First Responders were under 55. Other cancers are being seen in equally high incidence as well. Some people have even succumbed to more than a type of cancer at the same time. These numbers have been seen worldwide only on the occasion of nuclear catastrophes. This too should tell us something.
• 9/11 en de connectie met de wereld van biotechnologie en virologie:
  We should mention the strange fact that microbiology became a high risk job immediately after the events of 9/11. Thus, on the 4th of October 2001, a commercial aircraft that was flying from Israel to Novosibirsk was “mistakenly” shot down right above the Black Sea by a surface-to-air Ukrainian missile supposedly used in some military exercises and that it allegedly deviated a hundred kilometres from its intended trajectory. Initially they said that it was a charter flight, but in fact it was a regular scheduled flight ― flight Air Sibir 1812.20 The city of Novosibirsk is well-known for being Russia’s scientific capital, having some of the most important research centres in the field of microbiology. We cannot overlook the fact that on that flight there were reported to be at least five Israeli microbiologists.21 On the 12th of November 2001, Benito Que, 52, an expert in cellular biology and infectious diseases was found lying in a coma on the street near his laboratory at the University of Miami Medical School. The Miami Herald wrote then that he had been allegedly attacked by four individuals armed with baseball bats, though the official version was that the scientist had suffered a stroke. He died on the 6th of December. He was an expert in sequencing DNA and had worked with Don C. Wiley and David Kelly, two other microbiologists who “committed suicide”.22 Four days after Que’s accident, on the 16th of November 2001 Don C. Wiley, 57, one of the best known American experts in the field, disappeared.23 The car he had rented was found on the Hernando de Soto Bridge near Memphis, Tennessee ― with a full tank and keys in the ignition. Wiley had just dined with some friends and was preparing to go on holiday with his family.24 His body was found on the 20th of December in the Mississippi river five hundred kilometres away. The official version was that the scientist could have suffered vertigo and fallen off the bridge. Wiley was an expert in the study of the way the immune system responds to viral attacks ― for instance, to HIV, Ebola or the flu.25 He had obtained an important award for the results of his research in the field of antiviral vaccines. He also dealt with sequencing DNA. He had worked with David Kelly.26 On the 23rd of November 2001 Vladimir Pasechnik, 64, a specialist in very nice activities such as vaporizing bubonic plague, was found dead in Wiltshire, England, not far from his house. Pasechnik had been charged with developing bioweapons for the Soviet Union, but he joined the western block at the beginning of the nineties.27 The next day, on the 24th of November an airplane belonging to the company Crossair crashed in Switzerland. Among its passengers there were also three distinguished Israeli scientists: Yaacov Matzner, 54, the dean of the Medical Department at Hebrew University, Amiramp Eldor, 59, chief of the Haematology Department in Ichilov Hospital, Tel Aviv and Avishai Berkman, 50, manager of the Public Health Department in Tel Aviv.28 On the 10th of December, Robert Schwartz, 57, was found murdered in his holiday house in Loudoun, Virginia. He dealt with sequencing DNA and pathogenic agents.29 On the 11th of December, Set Van Nguyen, 44, was found dead at the entrance to the refrigerating room of his laboratory in Geelong in the Australian state of Victoria. He had gone inside, forgetting that the room was filled with toxic gas which killed him instantantly. Five years earlier in the same research centre they had managed to isolate a virus from the family of Paramyxoviridae, the same family the SARS virus belongs to.30
  On the 9th of September 2002, Victor Korshunov, 56, the chief of the Microbiology Department at the State University in Moscow, was found dead on a street in the capital of Russia. Two other Russian scientists, Ivan Glebov and Alexei Brushlinski had been killed a couple of weeks before that.31 On the 11th of February 2002, Ian Langford, 40, was found dead in his home in Norwich, England.32 On the 27th of February, Tania Holzmayer, 46, a Russian scientist who had immigrated to the United States was shot dead by another microbiologist, Guyang Huang. After that the latter was found dead in a park with a gun at his side. Tania Holzmayer was studying the human genome.
  David Winn-Williams, 55, an astrobiologist involved with the study of the existence of germs above the terrestrial atmosphere, died on the 24th of March, hit by a car while he was jogging.34 A day later, Steven Mostow, 63, nicknamed “Dr. Flu” for his expertise in treating this illness, died after his plane, a Cessna, crashed due to an apparent loss of one of the engines during the landing approach. Mostow was also a well known expert in biological terrorism.35 On the 24th of June, Doctor Leland Rickman, 47, died in Africa, allegedly from a stroke. He was an expert in infectious diseases as well as an advisor on issues regarding bio-terrorism.36 The last one on the list (can we be sure of that?) is David Kelly, 59, an expert in microbiology and an advisor of the British Government on biological weapons of mass destruction. Kelly was found dead in a forest. The result of the investigation was that it had been suicide, despite the fact that all the evidence pointed to murder. A few months later, proof came out that David Kelly was about to write a book revealing the plans great nations had regarding biowarfare.37 We should probably add to the list the names of Jeffrey Paris, 49, crushed by a car near a parking lot on the 6th of November 200138 and that of Christopher Legallo, 33, a terrorism analyst who died in a plane crash on the 30th of December 2002. His wife Laura Koepfler, a mass destruction weapons analyst, should have been with him but a last minute change of plans came up.39
  John Clark, a microbiologist whose research opened the path to cloning the famous sheep Dolly, hanged himself on the 12th of August, 2004. Leonid Strahunski, an expert in creating microorganisms which resist the effects of bioweapons, was killed on the 8th of June 2005 by a bottle of champagne which, instead of going to his head, hit him right on the head ― a fine blow indeed. David Banks, 40, an expert in the prevention of epidemics, died on the 8th of May 2005 aboard the now popular crashing airplane. On the 13th of October 2004, Matthew Allison, a molecular biologist, got into his car which was in a parking lot; the car exploded just as in the movies. Finally let us mention Antonina Presniakova, a scientist who was closely connected to bioweapons. On the 25th of May 2004 she was also the protagonist of a scene that looked to be taken from the movies: she accidentally pricked herself with a needle infected with Ebola virus which, of course, killed her.
  What has been happening of late in the field of microbiology that may be more important than the anthrax-laden letters? It was the SARS epidemic.43 There is no comparison between the two! Usually scientists are murdered when they know too much; and another thing: they are killed before they disclose anything. That being said, might it not be that the scientists on our list were assassinated because they knew too much about the SARS epidemic and their knowledge, if revealed, could bring many liabilities? On the other hand, what other inconvenient knowledge could those scientists have possessed so that someone felt it was their duty to eliminate them? Be very careful how you answer that last question! That is because, out of all possible hypothesis, the answer you fear the most might in reality be the most desirable and pleasant of them all. If all these microbiologists who died in unusual circumstances all over the world were murdered because of the knowledge they possessed of the SARS event that means ― despite what you may think ― that the more optimistic hypothesis is true. The alternative is much, much more alarming.
  My advice to you is ― once again ― relax, think of something else, clear your thoughts while sipping on a cup of coffee, go on a holiday or entertain yourself with a porno film. In any case do not go on airplanes with microbiologists who specialize in sequencing DNA, because they are the type of scientists that are most in danger. Sequencing DNA is exactly the specialization one needs for the genetic manipulation of the coronavirus responsible with spreading the SARS syndrome ― fancy that!
  The SARS epidemic in China could have been the result of bio-economic warfare meant to slow down the country’s development. Or, even more likely, a warning for the nation that owns the largest amount of American dollars and debits in the world not to initiate any rash actions that could put the United States in a difficult position.
  In May 2005 the Operation Trimming Down Humanity we have been mentioning finally received a name: Global Cleanse 2000. The idea belongs to a former NASA researcher, Rene Welch, who revealed that she had found out, seemingly from the Bin Laden family, that within the higher spheres of power in American politics they had been preparing an operation such as September 11 ever since the 80’s as well as World War plans or plans to reduce global population. Welch allegedly kept everything a secret for more than fifteen years because she had reached a tacit agreement with the FBI and CIA to be left alone in exchange for her silence; but on the eve of the implementation of the plan she changed her mind. This is a story that should give food for thought. Could Welch be a compulsive liar? She might be. And yet it seems that her story was confirmed by another scientist, Ronald Logsdon, from Philadelphia. Also it seems there is a third person who witnessed the meetings between Welch and the bin Ladens.
  Then, in October 2005 the news came out that the virus of the Spanish flu, which killed between thirty and fifty million people at the beginning of the 20th century, was being grown in a laboratory. Research had been ongoing ever since 1997, when fragments of genetic material from the lung tissues of people who had died from the disease were taken as samples. Another striking coincidence: it turned out that the Spanish flu virus (of the type H1N1) seemed to be similar to H5N1, the bird flu virus; Spanish flu had been transmitted from birds to human beings also, as a result of similar mutations as the ones we are witnessing today. It appears that in the enchanted world of Coincidences in a Row, there is nothing strange in the fact that growing in a laboratory a virus which appeared more than a hundred years ago coincides with the spontaneous chance appearance of a very similar type of virus.50 The story becomes even more alarming when we discover that the terrible Spanish flu from 1918 was quite likely created in a laboratory as a biological weapon; it seems this happened in Fort Riley, Kansas. In due course this hypothesis became ever more plausible when it turned out that the first breeding grounds were among the soldiers on the battlefields of the First World War.
• 9/11 en predictive programming:
  The only slightly puzzling one is what appears in a scene of Terminator 2, during the famous scene of the where the big truck is chasing the motorcycle. The truck crashes against a bridge where a red graffiti is warning us: BEWARE 9-11. 94 The film was made in 1991, exactly ten years before the event, and released two months before George Bush’s famous speech announcing a New World Order.
  In September 2001, the film Anthrax was finalized and about to be distributed. Its subject was the outbreak of an anthrax epidemic in America and it was the first film to deal with the subject of this bacterium unknown to the wider public until that time. Suddenly though, the anthrax-laden letter terrorized America (could it have been earlier than planned?) and the movie wasn’t distributed in cinemas. Later on, it came out but only on DVD.
  Matrix (1999), as a science fiction film is what you’d call a B-movie, since the science of the film is quite ridiculous and implausible. But the allegory of the film is worth mentioning since it made history. The message of the allegory is that we are alive in two different parallel worlds, an illusionary one in which most people are induced to believe by way of brainwashing and deception, and a real one which however typically happens to be less pleasant, and which is accessible only to those who have the guts to stand it. This duality is symbolized by the choice between the blue pill and the red pill, which Neo, the main character, has to make at one point. Neo thus becomes the symbol of someone who chooses hard reality versus a comfortable illusion. And, is it just a coincidence that Neo’s passport expires on… September 11, 2001? If you don’t know what I am talking about, watch again the early scene where Mr. Smith is sitting in front of Neo and turning the pages of his file, while he mentions Neo’s parallel lives. For a tenth of a second or so you see a page where a picture of Neo’s passport is visible, upside down, then the page gets flipped. Freeze that frame. Turn it 180°. Read. And here you have it. The passport of the character who is a symbol of the awakening from the delusions of the official narratives of the world expires on September 11, 2001. The film was made in 1999.
  One of the most disturbing and mysterious cinematic works is the well-known The Day After Tomorrow (2004), directed by Roland Emmerich, the same person who directed Independence Day. The film appeared a few months after the Pentagon had made public a study which predicted high-scale environmental disasters that were to come in the following years or decades; these disasters included the Gulf Stream slowing to a dead stop and bringing about a Siberian climate in all of Western Europe. I wonder why the Pentagon insists so much in convincing us that “global warming is worse than Al Qaeda”.
  And yet, the fact that The Day After Tomorrow turned out to be another dramatic and disconcerting trailer for some other events that were to come true makes us feel very uneasy. The most spectacular catastrophes illustrated in the film are the tsunami which hits New York and the hurricane that devastates Los Angeles. One year later, a tsunami nearly wiped Sumatra off the face of the earth, and the year after that, a hurricane destroyed New Orleans. But these could just be coincidences...
  In a conference about the September 11 events which took place in Bologna, Italian member of the European Parliament Giulietto Chiesa confessed to having been invited by the European Defence Committee to attend ― that was the expression written on the invitation ― “the screening of a film which simulated a terrorist nuclear attack on Brussels”. That was a real film in the form of a live feature report.
• Bestaat al-qaeda wel?
  In it there were all the elements you would expect to find: the familiar faces of the CNN reporters who announced the horrible attack, the same information aired by Al Jazeera and other important international television networks, the reactions and appearance in the flesh of contemporary political leaders, while in the background there were satellite images of the radioactive cloud which advanced towards Northern Europe. There were also images of how the “true” Osama bin Laden claimed responsibility for dropping the nuclear bomb, talking in Arab with English subtitling on the usual tape “sent to Al Jazeera”. Who made such an elaborate and expensive film and why, since it was meant for a small and restricted audience ― the members of the European Parliament? We have immediately found out who it was that made it. The show was offered by CSIS, the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, a think-tank that was said to derive from the CIA. The question that remains is why did they do it? What interest did the Americans have in investing a great deal of money in a piece of cinematic entertainment for a few members of the European Parliament? Were they trying to convince European politicians that Al Qaeda really exists? What is that, a joke? Once someone stops believing in fairy tales it is not that easy to make him believe again. And I seriously doubt that there are members of the European Parliament who still believe in the myth of Osama bin Laden, the Santa Claus of Evil. And the Americans know that. Let us recap: if the Americans are aware of the fact that European politicians already know that Osama bin Laden was actually America in disguise, what could be the message of the blockbuster made for a handful of people in the know? (And it is not even a well-camouflaged message.) The answer is simple and tragically clear. Here is what we can do ― is the phrase we can almost glimpse with our minds’ eyes amongst this film’s frames. And here is what we are willing to do. We can drop an atomic bomb on Brussels and we will know how to blame it on the terrorists in Al Qaeda. In order to dissipate the scepticism which some of you might feel, we will show you a preview of the footage of that “horrible reality” your newscasts will air when the tragedy really happens ― footage presented as authentic material, the result of first class journalism, one hundred percent documented. Who will doubt what he sees with his own eyes on television? It certainly won’t be you, members of the European Parliament, because you “will have tragically disappeared in the most horrendous tragedy of all times”. Maurizio Blondet comments that the “gift” from the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington looks a lot like the symbol the Mafia sends its victims ― a dog’s head cut off. The threat is clear, precise and unequivocal. And perhaps now you will understand why your favourite politician, the one you voted for at the last elections, seems to shamelessly admit that, at his age, yes! ― he still believes in the existence of Osama bin Laden, the one and only Santa Claus of Evil.
• Komt ooit de waarheid boven aangezien veel bewijs is vernietigd, verdwenen of onbruikbaar:
  We can form our own opinions, personal or even collective, but we will never be able to establish a truth universally accepted. Much of the evidence (and I mean here the two hundred thousand tons of molten steel from the Twin Towers) has been destroyed. Other pieces of evidence (the black boxes from the aircrafts) were declared useless. Significant clues that had remained intact have been classified as top secret; in other words, they were information that was to remain inaccessible to the public due to the so-called national interest. When these documents are declassified ― if such a day is to come ― we may possibly get closer to the truth.
• Terug naar al-qaeda:
  Working closely with the ISI, the Pakistani intelligence services, the CIA contributed decisively to creating instruction camps for thousands of mujahedeen warriors; and since the American intelligence services acted only through ISI, the Afghans had no idea that behind the help they received was the CIA ― which was directly interested in the Soviets failing. Consequently, tens of thousands of Islamic fundamentalists fought and gave their lives for the United States without knowing. Osama bin Laden himself declared at the time that he hadn’t seen any Americans on the scene. Could he have been a poor fool and a puppet in the hands of the Master Puppeteer behind him? As reported by Michael Chossudovsky, professor of economics at the University of Ottawa37, in 1987 the Americans delivered 65,000 tons of military equipment to the mujahedeen. Before the CIA intervention Afghanistan only had a few opium plantations dedicated especially to the local market. In only two years after the CIA started their operations Afghanistan became the largest heroin producer in the world ― the source for 60% of US consumption. It is no secret that the CIA itself initiated and managed the plantations it needed as well as the traffic and marketing activities in order to finance its own local operations ― everything of course in collaboration with the ISI.38 The CIA invested a lot in Osama bin Laden, considering that it was easier to have him under control than the Afghans. The history of those years has been studied thoroughly39 and ― in case you love details ― on the internet there are a few analyses of the first (alleged) contacts between Osama and American intelligence agents.40 Therefore, what we call Al Qaeda today is mostly an American creation, founded by the CIA and ISI in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets. A creature some consider to be a sort of Frankenstein’s monster which rebelled against its own creator.
  At this point I cannot help but mention the excellent documentary made by the BBC, The Power of Nightmares (2004), which we have mentioned earlier in this book. The film proves that the existence of an Al Qaeda network is impossible because even the name ― “Al Qaeda” ― is most likely an invention of the Americans. According to the BBC the term “Al Qaeda” was mentioned for the first time (and only time, for quite a while) in January 2001 by an individual accused of terrorism in America; it is quite likely that this man obtained certain benefits from admitting he belonged to a so-called “network of terror”. Some say that an Arab could never have named his own organization thus, because “Ana raicha Al Qaeda” allegedly means “I must go to the toilet” in colloquial Arabic.41 If this is true one might think that in the control room there is someone with a great sense of humour. Or perhaps that the Big Joker was the prisoner himself. The jailers wanted him to confess he was part of a network? All right: he simply told them to piss off. Unaware that using a bit of slang might be the source of the War against Terror.
  And are we sure that this “Al Qaeda” rebelled against its own creator?42 The question makes sense because, let us not forget, the organization didn’t know that behind its reference point ― the ISI ― were the Americans. It is interesting to notice that the Pakistani intelligence service supported ― and most likely still support ― the Chechen terrorists and trained them in its own training camps.43 On the other hand, it is common knowledge that Bin Laden also had contacts with Chechen terrorists.44 How come? Did the ISI, controlled by the CIA, continue to support Islamic terrorism in Chechnya, together with ― or, at the same time as ― Osama? In this case, the obvious question about the organization which rebelled against its creator isn’t as regards Al Qaeda, but the ISI. But the ISI was always with the United States. As I have said before, the chief of the ISI was coincidentally in Washington the week before September 11 visiting the White House, the Pentagon and the CIA, while one of his employees was placing a hundred thousand dollars in Mohamed Atta’s account. Therefore the ISI is completely trustworthy. On the contrary, if it had acted against American interests, Washington wouldn’t have hesitated to bomb Pakistan. Since nothing like this happened it means Pakistan and its intelligence service isn’t a threat to American interests.
  While the ISI chief was having breakfast with various members of the American Congress all Hell broke loose in Manhattan and Osama bin Laden suddenly became America’s Public Enemy Number One, although he was also supporting terrorism in Chechnya alongside the ISI. Chechnya is an extremely important strategic point for the control of a great oil reserve in the Caspian Sea. Bin Laden may be America’s public enemy number one but he is also its greatest benefactor since all of his actions ended up serving the United States one way or the other.
  To better understand this side of our story we must realise that we are actually not observing real facts, but watching a cartoon instead. In fact in the real world no one can be as unlucky as Osama bin Laden. He can very well be compared with Donald Duck. From the very beginning the poor fellow cannot do anything right. He fights against Soviet imperialism thinking that he is supporting the Muslim cause but, in the end, the one who stands to gain is Uncle Sam who comes in to replace Soviet imperialism. A few years after that he intervenes to support the Kosovo Liberation Army (UCK) against the Serbs without even knowing that the Albanian soldiers were trained and armed by the Americans. The same thing goes for the Bosnia issue, a few years before.45 Then, in a fit of megalomania, Donald-Osama attacks the Twin Towers and the Pentagon but the one who stands to gain is Uncle Sam once more, who, as an immediate reaction, as an appetizer swallows Afghanistan ― in a single gulp, crushing, thus, Osama’s poor friends, the mullahs; then on comes the main course ― Iraq, seasoned with the “pinch” of oil found, casually, in its basements.
  Although he desperately realizes that all his attempts to defeat the American demon systematically produce the opposite results, Osama doesn’t give up. What? America invades Iraq? All right: he blows up a few buildings in Saudi Arabia and plants some bombs in Morocco. He shouldn’t have done that! Because after each of Al Qaeda’s attacks, Saudi Arabia, a country that has always been unhappy with the presence of foreign military bases on its territory, has to give up the attempt to send the Americans back home. Without wanting to, Osama forces the Americans to remain in Saudi Arabia. The UN refuses to legitimise American intervention in Iraq? Very well: Al Qaeda bombs UN headquarters in Baghdad, twice. But once again Donald-Osama is fooled because shortly after the event the UN authorized the invasion of Iraq and its occupation by American forces. Osama is really frustrated because whatever he does turns against him! What? Turkey is against American forces transiting its territory on their way to Iraq? No problem! A powerful signal to the world is needed and that is how several bombs are detonated by Osama in Istanbul on precisely the day when Bush and Blair meet in London! This way, the whole world must realize that these so-called leaders are impotent to fight terrorism! But what happens instead is that the world is scared and respectfully listens to the leaders of these two great powers announcing live on TV that they will not back down in the face of terrorism. Supposedly the world then agrees, evermore disconcerted. And, most of all, the international press, ready to document the largest protest against a foreign head of state that had ever taken place on British soil, ends up dedicating the front page to the attacks in Istanbul. Thus, the huge protest against Bush magically disappears from the media and, consequently, from our reality. Oh, what an opportunity our Donald Duck missed! Oh, how he played into Uncle Sam’s hands again!
  Osama is down in the dumps. His troops, made up of kamikaze soldiers, go in and out of any country they want to, loaded with explosives, and they never encounter any problems. Despite this, no matter what they do, the effect of their actions is always contrary to the initial intention. At one time our Donald Duck decided that Italian cuisine wasn’t to his liking ― otherwise, he would have had no reason to blow up a military base filled with Italian soldiers in Nassiriya. Some say that no one in this world hates the Italians. Others even say that even the Iraqis have nothing against Italians, although they suddenly found themselves invaded by them without any prior invitation. So it seems Donald-Osama hates Italian cuisine because pasta is the expression of freedom. Osama hates freedom more than anything else (and so far no one has been able to explain why that is); perhaps he hates the Sanremo festival or something like that. Anyway, the thing is that he threw a few well-placed bombs at the Italian soldiers. That is also something he shouldn’t have done! From that day forward, Italy was filled with nationalist and anti-Islamic groups. Then someone in the cave in which the terrorists were hiding must have cooked Osama a bad paella the man obviously didn’t like. As a result seven Spanish intelligence agents who were engaged in some unknown mission in Iraq were done in. All Europe started fearing and looking daggers at Arabs on the street. To cool things down, Donald-Osama announced a soon-to-come biological attack on Europe ― possibly, even before the American presidential elections in 2004. It was clear he wanted to ruin Bush’s re-election party because he must hate the man more than any person in the world. Last time, on September 11, he miscalculated and Bush’s popularity doubled in a matter of days, but this time… this time Osama was certain, more than certain, that things were going to be different and the detestable Bush was finally going to get what he deserved.
  The promise of a biological attack isn’t without consequences. Someone is quick to state the following: “The worst thing that could happen is if terrorists acquire and then use a biological, chemical or nuclear weapon that inflicts heavy casualties. If that happens, the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy. In a practical sense […] it means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world ― it may be in the United States of America ― that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarise our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.” Who said that? Could it have been a die-hard conspiracist? No… How about a paranoid activist against globalisation? No… Then it must have been an old pensioner, right? Quite close… The statement was made in November 2003 by the U.S. Army General Tommy Franks, a high-ranking military officer who led the military forces which “freed” Iraq and who retired shortly after.46 I think we can take his word on this one. Donald-Osama is confused again. He no longer understands anything. He doesn’t even know if this is the fate he wants for his archenemy. What he knows is this: he hates the Western world because of its freedom. But General Franks predicts that, if weapons of mass destruction are used, the West will give up its freedom in favour of a militarised government. Osama hates the West because it is a free world ― President Bush has said it so many times ― but what will happen when the West is no longer free? How will he be able to hate it? On the other hand, if he stopped hating it the West would recover its freedom because it will no longer have to fear bin Laden and the threat he poses. Nothing comes out right for our poor Osama! He doesn’t even know how to act anymore. This is why he resorts to the only type of activity he knows how to carry out even when he doesn’t spend any time on making plans: another attack. This time it is going to be in Riyadh. He has no idea why, but the English intelligence services have already announced that he was going to commit an attack there47 so he shouldn’t let the whole world down. If he did, people would say that he is getting old and decrepit. And that he is peeing in his pants at the thought of the CIA predicting and announcing his attacks long before they take place, which means that they planted a spy close to him which is also why they are going to find him sooner or later. No, Donald-Osama cannot let the world live without terror. So puff! ― the bombs hit Riyadh. Unfortunately this forces the Americans to maintain their military bases in Arabia. Patience! This is not the first time. The poor guy is so down in the dumps that he doesn’t even realize the Ramadan has started and that it is not good for a good Muslim to commit certain acts on sacred soil during the period of fasting. Consequently, after being hated by the Western world, Osama receives scandalized reproaches even from an honest organization of Egyptian terrorists. Now, really!48 Poor Osama! Not even his own colleagues, the Islamic terrorists, understand him any more. If not even these guys support him, then who will appreciate his superhuman efforts to propagate Islam? Obviously delirious, Osama plans to send his kamikaze soldiers to attack the Vatican.49 But, wait, wasn’t the Vatican fiercely against the invasion of Iraq? Our poor Donald Duck can’t do anything right! The only exception is the massacre in Madrid, on the 11th of March. Aznar’s government turned out to be even more ridiculous than Osama and blamed the whole thing on their eternal internal opponents, ETA, but the sham was quickly discovered and then punished by the voters, which caused him to lose the elections. Finally, we had a success for Osama! What difference does it make that victory was gained through the opponent’s own-goal? It may just be the exception that confirms the rule. No one is perfect, not even the unluckiest of goofballs ― our Donald-Osama.
  You would have expected Osama to persist with the only sort of operations that succeeded, that is to say attacks at the times of European elections, but no. Everything is postponed for a later date. Instead, when the scandal about the torture the Americans inflicted on the prisoners at Abu Ghraib is out in the media all over the world, Osama is back in business and releases the video tape with the decapitation of poor Nick Berg, an American citizen, so that everyone should remember that no matter how evil the Americans might seem Al Qaeda is much, much worse. It is not just a coincidence that the victim had been imprisoned a few weeks earlier by the occupation authorities who held him captive for thirteen days before he ended up in the hands of Al Qaeda. Another bizarre coincidence is the fact that in the recording Berg was wearing an orange overall, similar to the ones worn by American prisoners and that he was sitting on a white chair identical to the ones at Abu Ghraib prison. Also unimportant is that Berg was decapitated by the local Al Qaeda chief, Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, the one who had been declared officially dead a few months before following an American air strike ― according to an official statement made by Associated Press.50
  Donald-Osama and his little nephews make increasingly more mistakes, involuntarily supplying advantages to their own enemies and at the same time giving a disastrous image to the Muslim world. Like Donald Duck, Osama isn’t really bad, he is just so unbelievably unlucky. It is true that if we were to interpret everything that happened in this vein, all makes sense. If we were to consider him the unlucky protagonist of an animation film, Osama suddenly becomes believable. We realize that he seems Donald Duck only when he is trying to cause damage in America. Because when he has to escape the rage of the most powerful army in the world, he suddenly and magically transforms into the impossible to capture mouse from Tom & Jerry. The United States spent billions of dollars hunting down Osama but the hunt didn’t bring any results. Everything has an explanation given that we are still in the land of cartoons. This is not the first time that the United States and Osama bin Laden play cops and robbers in perfect Tom & Jerry tradition, that is to say, without the cat ever managing to catch the mouse. And if the cat does catch it, it always lets it escape. Episode after episode, the cartoon series goes on for years. In March 1996 the United States officially protests about Sudan hosting bin Laden. Sudan doesn’t think twice and offers to extradite him to America. But it seems the Americans felt insulted because they declined the offer, still insisting that bin Laden should leave Sudan.52 Three months later, on the 25th of June, 1996 bin Laden “repays” the favour and organizes an attack at Dhahran, in Saudi Arabia, killing nineteen American soldiers and injuring another five hundred.53 And yet, bin Laden hasn’t become the hero of the Muslim world yet. First of all, he isn’t at all visible hidden in the caves of one of the most remote countries of this world. He is promoted to the category of “visible character” on the 20th of August, 1998, when the United States allegedly try to kill him by sending no less that sixty-six Cruise missiles at his headquarters. For some mysterious reason all of them miss the target. Of course not everyone can survive an attack by sixty-six smart missiles but in cartoons everything is possible. And that is how Osama bin Laden suddenly became the hero of all Muslims. How can you not worship someone that has survived the explosion of sixty-six Cruise missiles? Could you survive an attack by sixty-six missiles?54 In the year 2000 Bush is elected President and ― according to a piece of information made public by the BBC ― the FBI is instructed not to proceed with an investigation into the bin Laden family with whom the Bush family had been involved in business for years.55 At the same time, news comes that Osama’s relationship with the bin Laden family hadn’t been interrupted at all as the official or less official statements kept repeating.
  In July, 2001 bin Laden, who by now had been promoted “America’s public enemy number one”, is hospitalised for ten days in a private clinic in Dubai, where ― according to the French newspaper Le Figaro ― he receives the visit of a local CIA agent.56 Do you find that strange? You shouldn’t find it strange because, after all, even Tom & Jerry stop chasing each other sometimes and go together to grab a cup of coffee. With September 11 Osama bin Laden is enthroned as the world’s most evil character and Bush releases the famous Patriot Act, through which most of the civil rights of American citizens are abrogated in order to capture bin Laden. But he doesn’t abrogate the civil rights of the bin Laden family. On the contrary, between the 13th and the 19th of September, 2001, they are allowed to leave the United States aboard a private jet, without even inviting them for brunch to ask them a simple question ― what the hell is Osama up to?57 On the other hand, it is easy to understand why they didn’t do this if we think that the two families have been excellent business partners for more than twenty years; after all, their friendship can’t be ruined because of a trifle such as taking down the Twin Towers.
• Ok, OBL is dus een grapjas, elke aanval die hij uitvoert, is toevallig in het VOORDEEL van de V.S. en hun plannen. Keer op keer schiet hij in eigen voet en hij bleef maar doorgaan, tientallen jaren... Maar dan heb je nog niet gelezen wat een clown KSM is, de "mastermind" achter 9/11:
  Only that this Khalid Sheikh Mohammed didn’t stop at planning the September 11 events. Our funny guy has also done other mischievous things. What kind of things? He organized the 1993 World Trade Center attacks (six fatalities and over one thousand people injured), personally decapitated the American journalist Daniel Pearl in Afghanistan, planned the attack of the shoe-bomber, Richard Reid (the demented guy who allegedly wanted to blow up an airplane with explosive hidden in his shoes), planned the attack on a disco in Bali in 2002 (more than two hundred people were killed), and the bomb attack in a hotel in Mombasa. He directed the production of chemical and bacteriological weapons, including the anthrax which terrified America in 2001, anthrax many scholars in American universities already proved came from the U.S. labs at Fort Detrick. What is more, he was the operational commander of Al Qaeda and “the P.R. and media representative” for Al Zarqawi. But even more awesome than what he did, is what he intended to do. After the Twin Towers, he was set on destroying the Empire State Building, Sears Tower in Chicago, Library Tower in California and Wall Street. Destroying the suspended bridges of New York. He wanted to blow up the Panama canal (as in the marionette film Team America) and sink the American tankers in the Strait of Gibraltar and Hormuz and in Singapore harbour. He intended to attack American nuclear plants and NATO headquarters in Europe. He was planning to take down twelve more American airliners full of passengers, demolish Big Ben in London, where he was also planning to destroy Heathrow airport and Canary Wharf. He wanted to bomb the American embassies in Indonesia, Australia, Japan, India, Azerbaijan and the Philippines. Also, he planned to strike other American, British and Israeli targets in Turkey, and bring down the economy on Wall Street. Apart from all this, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed admitted to being responsible for “planning, training, surveying, and financing” an attack at Plaza Bank, in the state of Washington. And here it finally happens that the obviously supernatural powers of the sinister character suddenly switch on in their full glory65, given that Plaza Bank was built three years after Khalid was arrested.66 From deep inside the CIA dungeons it seems our hero managed not only to learn about the creation of Plaza Bank (by telepathy), but also to plan, train, survey and ― here the level of mastery reaches the top ― finance the terrorist attack (Wow! That’s clearly a ten-Dan black belt in telepathy and a never before seen remote control of bank accounts mental technique!)
  To cap it all, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed intended to assassinate Pope John Paul the 2nd during his visit to the Philippines, as well as the Pakistani President Musharraf and a few American former Presidents, of whom he was eager to single out Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton.
  Khalid Sheikh Mohammed pleaded guilty for all of these accusations. In other words, we would have finally seen a sort of do-it-yourself world war. That completely eclipses the adventures of our poor Donald Duck Osama! Newspapers around the world reported the news, but they omitted the many details you have just read here. Could they have feared looking ridiculous by publishing them? But journalists obviously didn’t question the plausibility of all that. This is not what they are paid for. Leaving aside the deeds the poor scapegoat confessed to having committed, it is interesting to observe those he was intending to commit. Because we suspect that the true purpose of that information is, in fact, a veiled threat to certain nations and certain people of this world, reminding them what could happen should they not behave as is required.
• Laten we nu switchen naar 7/7 2004 in London. Valt er iets op?
  The terrorist attack on the 7th of July begins in fact ten days earlier, when powerful and mysterious speculations drag down the UK pound sterling: minus 6% against the American dollar in the course of ten days, something which is absolutely extraordinary. Whoever it was that organized the attacks had the power to weaken the pound by 6%. Neither the journalists from the biggest newspapers and television channels, nor the investigators paid any attention to this phenomenon.12 Two days before the attacks, Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Federal Reserve, unexpectedly places 40 billion dollars in cash on the financial market.13 On the morning of the 7th of July, three bombs explode almost simultaneously on the London Underground and a forth bomb blasts a bus. For almost an hour no one knows exactly what happened and the first information is about explosions due to electrical issues. Afterwards, the word spreads that these were bombings. On that day the Foreign Secretary Jack Straw states that these bombings “had the hallmarks of an Al-Qaeda-related attack” and Tony Blair agrees.
  otice how people in the government seem to know from the beginning and quite clearly the identity of the authors of the attacks, much more clearly than the people at Scotland Yard who, to begin with, don’t lose their temper. Bush’s comments are: “The war on terror continues”. We had no doubt about it. Someone is already mentioning bin Laden’s mythical successor, Al Zarqawi, whose supernatural powers we have mentioned earlier. The media talk about the attack being claimed on the Internet.15 The Italian secret services, however, considers the claim unreliable.16 This matters not a scrap. Then, on the same day something very strange happens. Radio BBC 5 broadcasts an interview with Peter Power, former Scotland Yard officer with experience in counter-terrorism and, at the time, Managing Director of Visor Consultants, a crisis management advice company.17 Power states that his company was running a major anti-terrorist exercise involving one thousand people, which included the London Underground being bombed at the exact same locations, at the exact same times, just as happened in real life: POWER: At half past nine this morning we were actually running an exercise for a company of over a thousand people in London based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning, so I still have the hairs on the back of my neck standing up right now.
  HOST: To get this quite straight, you were running an exercise to see how you would cope with this and it happened while you were running the exercise? POWER: Precisely, and it was about half past nine this morning, we planned this for a company and for obvious reasons I don’t want to reveal their name but they’re listening and they’ll know it. And we had a room full of crisis managers for the first time they’d met and so within five minutes we made a pretty rapid decision that this is the real one and so we went through the correct drills of activating crisis management procedures to jump from slow time to quick time thinking and so on.18 Power also made an appearance on ITN TV, confirming his own statements.19 Photo.76. Peter Power making his incredible statement on TV. “The coincidence” suggests we are dealing with the same pattern we have encountered in the case of the September 11 attacks, in America: the exact simulation of a terrorist attack which “by chance” becomes reality.
  We have clearly entered the realm of fantasy. From that moment onwards the events seem to be covered with a veneer of surrealism, and the first magical element is the fact that no journalist or investigator has seen fit to go back and investigate the imprudent but extremely interesting statements Power made. After all, there is a guy who says he was hired to project possible reactions to a simulated attack which then happened to really take place, and no one is interested in what he says? No one even asked him who was this client he was working for? Instead, to encourage the investigation, Tony Blair is against a parliamentary inquiry being carried out about the attacks, because that would distract the forces engaged in catching the perpetrators.20 This behaviour is an exact copy of Bush’s opposition to the inquiry demanded by the Congress in the weeks following September 11.
  According to the information made public, the terrorist arrived at Luton with a rental car. After paying the parking fee they left 16 bombs inside the car and then they went to blow themselves up on the underground. They were clearly planning other attacks which they were going to carry out on their return from their suicide mission.21 The terrorists are filmed by the surveillance cameras at 7:22 in the morning at Luton station. With a return ticket, they get on the 7:40 train for Kings Cross, a train which doesn’t exist because it had been suspended that day. Despite this, the terrorists arrive on the nonexistent train to Kings Cross at 8:16, just in time to be filmed by the surveillance cameras at 8:26.22 Newspapers publish photos of Middle Eastern men carrying large backpacks, but a witness who survived the explosions doesn’t remember anyone  with a backpack in the carriage. Instead he remembers very well that after the explosion the plates of the floor were bent upwards and that a policeman explained the bomb must have been placed under the carriage.23
  The terrorist who is about to blow himself up on the bus, Hasib Hussain, decides that before dying he could use a Big Mac at McDonald’s. It is perfectly normal for an Islamic fundamentalist who hates America and western society in general to crave for a hamburger from McDonald’s knowing that he is going to die within minutes.24 Then he calls his accomplices three times from his cell phone, accomplices who had conscientiously committed suicide already. He can’t believe the dead don’t answer the phone. With every call his voice gets even more restless. He then goes out of McDonald’s and gets on a bus where he will blow himself up. There are witnesses who claim that before the explosion Hussain nervously rummaged through his backpack.
  Through a curious coincidence none of the surveillance cameras on the bus were working that day, otherwise we would have know more about how things unfolded. Investigators are quick to suggest that the charge might have been military explosive given its exceptional power and the small space it took up.26 Some claim that the bombs were activated by a timer and that the bombers were certainly not suicidal.27 On July 12, the investigators firmly declare that the explosive used was a military one, based on the traces left by the explosion.28 However, on the 16th of July, the explosive suddenly becomes a homemade product made from acetone peroxide; this is something anyone can fabricate and the ingredients can easily be purchased from a pharmacy. They reached this conclusion because those substances were found in a few apartments in Leeds where the alleged terrorists supposedly lived, terrorists who haven’t been more clearly identified. The bombs were not activated by timers, even though they exploded at the same time, and the terrorists are now suicide terrorists.29
  In the meantime, the “chemist” arrested in Egypt is cleared by none other than the Egyptian interior minister, who dismissed as unfounded the accusations against him. It seems the man was a model student.33 Consequently he is actually released from prison. Little attention is given to these reports by the Western media that had kept the monster on the front page until then, considering the Egyptian citizen guilty.
  On the 18th of July, the London terrorists stop being suicidal, yet again. It turns out they had paid the parking for the rental cars because they had purchased a return ticket. Scotland Yard is rightfully considering the possibility that the terrorists had been deceived, because no suicides act that way. Among other things, two of them had pregnant wives and in that case it is inelegant to commit suicide.34 The no-longer-suicidal-terrorists soon become suicidal once again without any apparent reason. The analysis carried out by Scotland Yard is simply forgotten by everyone, including Scotland Yard. An explanation wouldn’t hurt, so on the 24th of July, the official statements claim the terrorists blew themselves up by pressing a button.35 What’s strange in that? If you were to choose between committing the attack by abandoning the backpack with the bomb, therefore saving your life, and dying in the explosion, what would you choose? The quality of the attack is not affected by your action and not even its success rate. The only significant difference is that in one case you die, in the other you live. What would you choose? Well, to die, of course. Wouldn’t anyone do the same?
  On the 21st of July a group of incompetent terrorists once again sow panic in London with backpacks that contained homemade bombs made of acetone peroxide, yet these bombs don’t go off. This episode strengthens the idea that on July 7 those terrorists also used homemade explosives.36 The operation is once again attributed to Al Qaeda, even if this claim is completely unreliable.37 A few days later one of the incompetent terrorists is arrested in Italy and the Italian investigators reach the conclusion he had nothing to do with Al Qaeda.38 Also on the 21st of July, George W.Bush brings up the London bombings as an argument for the need to renew the Patriot Act, which was otherwise due to expire.39 Congress renews it, albeit with a narrow majority, for another ten years.
  On the 22nd of July, on the London Underground, the police forces kill Charles de Menezes, a Brazilian citizen, with eight shots to the head after having immobilized him, inside a carriage. All the reasons invoked in order to explain the whole thing vanish in the following weeks, creating however a disturbing suspicion: the ever increasing scandal gets to occupy the front pages of British newspapers, pushing aside reports about the results of the investigations of the attacks.41 In August the only thing England talks about is the Charles de Menezes case.
  But there is another hypothesis which is circulating ― that killing the Brazilian citizen wasn’t accidental or the result of an error, given that usually you don’t shoot someone in the head so many times by mistake. In the hours following the attack there were rumours that the explosions might have been due to some electrical problems on the underground. De Menezes was an electrician. Could these two facts be related?
  Consequently, one of the agents responsible for the “mistake” will even receive a promotion. The English government has always refused to establish a commission of enquiry asked to investigate the most terrible terrorist attack that ever happened on English soil, claiming that the inquiry would “distract the forces involved in the war on terrorism”. Nevertheless, an official government report declares, in June 2006, that the four “bombers” responsible for the attacks had nothing to do with Al Qaeda.44 If you want to investigate the details of this grotesque story, forget the now hopelessly corrupted newspapers and TV newscasts. As usual, your only option is the internet.
• Nog enkele algemene beschouwingen:
  On the 25th of March, Brzezinski publishes an article in The Washington Post, titled “Terrorized by ‘War on Terror’. How a Three-Word Mantra Has Undermined America”.99 This is a frontal attack directed at the neocons’ myth of the War on Terror which the “hawk” Brzezinski bluntly describes exactly as it really is; the blow is so hard it seems you are listening to the opinions of an “anti-American”. The results of the phantom War on Terror are obvious, and Brzezinski puts them on paper: “A recent BBC poll of 28,000 people in 27 countries that sought respondents’ assessments of the role of states in international affairs resulted in Israel, Iran and the United States being rated (in that order) as the states with ‘the most negative influence on the world.’ Alas, for some that is the new axis of evil!” Brzezinski said it himself. On the other hand, during that period Europol published its first report on terrorism in Europe.100 In 2006, the total number of acts of terrorism in all European countries was 486. Is it therefore true that we were lashed by Islamic terrorism, as we were told over and over again? Not exactly. Of these 486 attacks, 136 were perpetrated by the Basque separatist group ETA, the runner-ups being the Corsican separatists (whoever heard of them?), followed by extreme left-wing groups. Falling far behind were the right-wing extremists with only one incident. The number of terrorist attacks carried out by Islamic terrorists is precisely zero. This looks more effective written in capital letters: ZERO. This is the incontrovertible reality of figures. Does it correspond to the picture painted for you by newspapers and television channels you help finance with your money?
  And what about the controversial fate of the famous American writer Hunter S. Thompson, one of the most representative authors of the American counterculture?159 On February 19, 2005, Thompson confesses on the telephone to an acquaintance (Paul William Roberts), that someone intends to stop him from publishing his new book, in which he recounts how the Twin Towers were demolished by the use of explosives. “They’re gonna make it look like suicide”, he said, “I know how these bastards think…”160 The following day Hunter S. Thompson commits suicide without any warning, using a gun, apparently with a silencer (the sound heard by his wife and son was muffled and didn’t seem like a shot), while talking on the phone with his consort and after having just asked her to come over and write an article together. This news is made public by the CNN. After that, the story of his suicide changes, the old version disappearing from the CNN website (but we can still find it on Archive.org161), and in the new version Thomson commits suicide in the kitchen, in front of his typewriter which mysteriously contained a page with the word “counsellor” typed in the centre.162 Hunter S. Thompson was a famous writer and a book of his about September 11 would have had an explosive impact on American audiences, unlike the texts written by unknown people such as ourselves, easy to ignore and to discredit in the eyes of fools.
  The myth of the homemade liquid bombs was created in England in 2006. The British police announced that they had foiled a terrorist plot that would have involved “mass murder on an unimaginable scale”.168 This is what the BBC title literally said. The terrorists were planning to detonate liquid bombs on at least ten aircraft. Well, look how they contradict what they previously stated ― ten aircraft exploding is certainly a mass murder, but on a perfectly imaginable scale. It could have been worse than September 11, the British minister of interior declared. In the end it all turned out to be a soap bubble. The accused were acquitted. None of the defendants had ever made any bomb. None of them had bought any airplane tickets. Many of them didn’t even have a passport.169 The only “explosive” found in their house was the notorious hydrogen peroxide, more popularly known as peroxide ― which can be found in anyone’s medicine cabinet, so I advise you to be on your guard against any explosions the next time you treat a scratch! Extreme hilarity ensued when an expert chemist described in detail the complex and practically impossible procedure that the terrorists would have had to put into practice on the aircraft in order to carry out the attack the newspapers were hollering about, a procedure which would have involved, among other things, them locking themselves in the airplane’s lavatory for several hours, setting up a small chemical laboratory, and they would still need plenty of luck.
  At this juncture, even the Nobel Prize winner Mikhail Gorbachev expressed his outrage at the manipulations of the Western Press, in the pages of the same Russian newspaper for which Politkovskaya wrote (not exactly pro-government)181. Nowadays, it is the West that is in need of a perestroika. And in keeping with Gorbachev’s views were also, surprisingly, those of the Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi who, during a famous encounter with the Russian President, declared in November: “I thank President Medvedev for appreciating Italy’s position concerning the Ossetian conflict. This position was based on knowledge of the facts. And I think these facts should help the international community understand what really happened and overcome the disinformation that took opinion far from reality.” 182 This meeting between Berlusconi and Medvedev became famous not because of the importance of the statement we quoted, which, as far as we know, was censored by all Western newspapers (of course they censored it since they were the ones that spread the disinformation the Prime Minister mentioned), but because of Berlusconi’s joke about the new American President whom he described as “young, handsome” and with “a good tan”183. A few days after that I happened to read in the online version of Corriere della Sera (the principal Italian daily newspaper) another statement made by Berlusconi in which he says that America’s plans to install missile and radar systems in Poland and the Czech Republic, officially meant to intercept missiles from Iran (!), are in fact a provocation addressed to Russia, as is the recognition of Kosovo, provocations that could lead to a new Cold War184. All of these are true, but unheard of from a leader of a NATO nation! The only comment we know that was made on this statement was that of Giulio Andreotti, probably one of the most important politicians in post-war Italian politics, who discreetly advised Berlusconi to stay away from certain topics.185 The news immediately disappeared from the forefront of the media. Just as when the former President of Italy Francesco Cossiga declared in November 2007 that everyone knew that September 11 had been organized by the U.S. Secret Service.186 The news appears only once more in Corriere della Sera and, although it is a sensational journalistic bomb of global interest, no one else in the Western media feels compelled to research it further. One of the most incredible scoops you can imagine simply fades away into total silence. In the Western world, well on its way towards sovietisation, not even Prime Ministers or former Presidents are really important. If they stray one inch from the path of the script others have written for them, they are made invisible, transformed into nonpersons, whose statements are ignored, censored or sunk into oblivion.
  In 1999 a group of American geologists led by Miriam Katz published an article in Science199 which dealt with the study of submarine sediments. Their discovery was that 55 million years ago there had been a massive undersea landslide off the coast of Florida. Further investigation revealed that this occurred at the same time as another major event ― the massive extinction of various species. They also discovered (with the use of the isotope thermometer) that, at that time, the sea surface temperature rose by about 4-8°C. By comparison, this is a difference in temperature greater than the gap between the average temperature today and that of the last Ice Age. What Katz’s group had discovered was the remains of a landslide caused by the dissociation of methane hydrates. When organic matter decomposes, methane is produced. In vast marine areas algae grow, which, once dead, end up on the bottom of the sea where they decompose, thus producing methane. But at a certain depth the pressure is such that methane and water combine to form a semi-stable complex ― methane hydrate. Nevertheless, if you disturb this methane hydrate by lowering the pressure or increasing water temperature, it will decompose, thus releasing the methane. So what is the problem if methane is released? Well, methane is a greenhouse gas but it is also much, much more potent than carbon dioxide, which is produced by burning fossil fuel. It is twentyone-times more powerful. There are literally trillions of tons of these methane hydrates in the oceans (estimates reach a figure of approximately 100,000 trillion cubic metres). The undersea landslide discovered by Katz’s team seems to have been caused by the dissociation of methane hydrates.
  It would be enough for a small amount of methane to be released and we would have a warming equal to what we are already experiencing nowadays. In 1999, outside the circle of experts, there were few who took note of the situation, since the quantity of methane released by this landslide couldn’t have heated Earth to the extent we now know it did. Miriam Katz herself specified this in her study. Something was missing... Later on, in 2004 a team of Norwegian geologists led by Henrik Svensen published another article in the magazine Nature.200 They had discovered that 55 million years ago a large intrusion of magma had hit (or at least heated) a major seam of carbon rich sediment off the Norwegian coast. This released methane-containing gases (and possibly carbon dioxide too) through vents in the sea floor. Judging by the size of these vents (about 80,000 square kilometres) they estimate that a similar amount of carbon gas was released as we humans released during the whole decade of the 1990s. Keep in mind that during the nineties the quantity of gas emissions was equal to almost half of the entire quantity of greenhouse gases released since the industrial revolution of the eighteenth century to this day. This allows you to get a better idea of the extent of the Norwegian emission in question. Pulling all this together, here is what seems to have happened in the lower Eocene. Something initially warmed the Earth and its oceans. We know this for certain. That something may well have been greenhouse gases released from a magma intrusion into carbon rich sediments. The amount of greenhouse gases that was released is comparable to our own current release of greenhouse gases by burning our own carbon-rich sediments (in our case, coal and oil). This warmed the Earth and the oceans. This in turn destabilised methane hydrates on parts of the ocean floor (we know this certainly happened). This further warmed the planet far more than we are now warming the planet through burning fossil fuels. The oceans became more acidic, and this caused a major extinction event of many calcium-shelled creatures (we also know that this happened with certainty).
  Meanwhile, on land, many of the terrestrial species were affected either through ecological shift or because some species went extinct. We know that in some places land species did change and, most likely, given the changes in ocean temperatures, many terrestrial (land-based) ecosystems were severely disrupted. This super warm event lasted several thousand years. While this super warming was bad for many species it does appear to have helped one then minor class of animals, the mammals to evolve: the evolutionary competition mammals were up against was largely wiped out. Of course while this helped some species of early mammal to evolve 55 million years ago, proto-human species were not to evolve for another 50 million years. Should we humans be faced today with such an Eocene warming event on our 9 billion crowded planet then billions would literally die. And notwithstanding the temperature increase over a few centuries, sea levels all over the planet would rise by over 80 metres. This would flood nearly all the World’s capital cities. The problem is that if a release of greenhouse gases occurred 55 million years ago in a quantity equivalent to half of what we have released since the industrial revolution up to this date, and this emission was the one which triggered the ocean methane hydrate decomposition, then we could well be in really big trouble.