portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article commentary united states

9.11 investigation

FOCUS on DOWNED FLIGHT is needed TO IMPEACH BUSH IN 2004 ! ! !

Ramsey Clark has written to urge the impeachment of George W. Bush. There's no doubt that there's evidence enough to support impeachment from the legalistic point of view, but practically impeachment is a very tough proposition with the Republican Party maintaining lock-down control of the Congress. The trick is to build a fire under the Congress with something that the American people can find believable.
No less eminent and renowned a jurist than former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark has written to urge the impeachment of George W. Bush. (See, repost titled "'Impeach Bush!' Resounds Across the Country", portland.indymedia, March 27, 2004.) There's no doubt that there's evidence enough to support impeachment from the legalistic point of view, but practically impeachment is a very tough proposition with the Republican Party maintaining lock-down control of the Congress. The trick is to build a fire under the Congress with something that the American people can find believable.

The reason that Bush still scores okay on "approval rating" polls is that there is no emphasis so far on the one specific human interest story with focus on the President in a moment of crisis that belies the propaganda that Bush somehow was the guy who held the nation together through its moment of crisis. To crack that delusion about Bush --- based entirely on spinning of the 9-11 tragedy --- requires something that the American people can believe, not anything like "conspiracy theory," just a straight-forward story like this:

"The word came in about the hijacked plane over Pennsylvania (Flight 93): Bush as President had to decide, so he gave the order and innocent Americans on Flight 93 died."

The only conspiracy that has to even be alleged is a conspiracy to hide the facts. No need to get involved in the perplexities that plague, for example, the Building 7 scenario --- demolition devices, timing of the explosions, and so forth. No need to suggest that Bush somehow wanted it to happen or was planning a "Pearl Harbor" to justify an invasion of Iraq. No need to try to explain a theory such as has been posted by Michael Kane ("Elephants in the Barracks") about emergency drills and war games conducted by NORAD on September 11 and also earlier (in October, 2000). Flight 93 is a particularly good issue because it could very easily be driven into a discussion of "Was Bush justified?" Like what would you have done? If the order to shoot it down had not been given, maybe it would have gone on to the Sears Tower in Chicago. Or, maybe the people on the plane were doomed anyway. But, you see, once the discussion reaches that point, Bush has already lost the election and it would actually be possible to impeach.

The Bush administration's strategy is to hamper the investigation any way they can. The objective of that strategy is to throw a smoke-screen around all the issues and so distract attention from the real weak point in the history of that fateful day. The weak point, that is, from the point of view of the Republican Party National Committee --- the most visible part of the shadow government.

TURNING THE TABLE SO THAT IT IS THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION THAT MUST RELY ON CONSPIRACY THEORY --- There is a theory, unsupported by facts and documentation, that the plane (Flight 93) somehow inexplicably blew up over Pennsylvania. That is the "conspiracy theory" about some demolition device that the Bush administration would be forced to rely on to defend itself if this story ever goes front and center. The plane --- originally intended to hit the third of the 9-11 targets, namely, the White House --- was flying westward away from its designated target. It was locked in by a NORAD jet and by the NORAD air defense system for that sector. In such a situation, the order to shoot a large passenger jet has to be obtained from the highest level --- the President. There is plenty here for competent investigators to analyze and work up --- from NORAD procedure to the recorded cell-phone call. See, in portland.indymedia archive, article titled "911 cell phone calls impossible", 02.Oct.2003, INCLUDING COMMENTS SHOWING THAT CELL PHONE CALL WAS TECHNICALLY POSSIBLE WITH DIGITAL TECH CELL-PHONE.

What Bush wants is a continued unfocused investigation that fails to move public opinion because it can easily be discounted as too complex and as conspiracy theory. What Bush fears is focus on the plane that was downed over Pennsylvania. He gave the order, either explicitly or by mumbling something incoherent when asked the question, to kill the passengers and crew on the air-liner that suffered an explosion and lost a wing and dropped from the sky over Pennsylvania. It is much less complicated than the other 9-11 issues and it goes directly to the electability of Bush in November. IF THE PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT BUSH GAVE THE ORDER TO SHOOT DOWN THE FLIGHT, BUSH MAY NOT EVEN BE ABLE TO CONTINUE IN OFFICE UNTIL NOVEMBER ! ! !!

The Bush administration is relieved to see so much discussion about what did they know and when they knew it, and so on, because what they really fear is that the news will focus on that incident in the sky over Pennsylvania. Further, there is the audio recording of a passenger calling from the plane on a cell phone describing the efforts of the passengers and the crew to take over the plane from the terrorist hi-jackers. That's the kind of thing that the American public can find believable.
David Ray Griffin's 2004 book: The New Pearl Harbor 28.Mar.2004 03:25

Dirtgardener

Don't read Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11" -- it'll cause you to think and ruin your whole day.
The forty pages of references notes in small print is enough to make your head spin.

The very long intro reads like a technical procedure manual but kicks into gear and becomes more interesting with Part One. I've just started reading Part Two.

old Gulf War I era pinback -- circa 1991 28.Mar.2004 03:29

Dirtgardener

Thought this was just a relic from the past.

United Airlines Flight 93 28.Mar.2004 09:47

links

How Did United Flight 93 Crash?
This website explores different theories of Flight 93's crash.
 http://www.flight93crash.com/

Flight 93: The Improbable Truth
 http://members.fortunecity.com/seismicevent/

downed flight 28.Mar.2004 12:45

mary uscitizen5@aol.com

bush should have downed all of the flights. and i know fl 93 (pennsylvania)was downed because i saw the tracer path on tv when i -- and dozens of others-- were pasted to the television while at a trade show in boston. the footage was "live" but we saw the tracer lines, then the footage quickly skipped over to something else. i and several people there looked at ea other and said "awhhh, they shot it down". the argument is, tho, that norad knew of the first hijacking at 8:20 in the a.m. and had plenty of time to scramble their jets, but nothing was done. I don't mean to sound belittling of the lives or efforts of those in fl 93, and i am certainly not insensitive to those who were on the 3 other flights. i am sorry if i sound like that. but somebody is lying -- faa, norad, secret service ?? -- who knows, but standard operating procedure was not followed that day. and the commission needs to find out why

what would be great would be video capture 05.Apr.2004 15:42

searching for proofs

What would be great for the whole 9/11 & flight 98 (along with the pentagon) if for someone to find screencaps of the live event as it happened on CNN and other newscasts. That is before they were edited and simply removed from the face of the earth. Someone out there must still have recordings of that faithfull day. On that day my video card was not working ok so i relied on the tv and the net to give me those footages later on... that was a big mistake since all the evidences got removed to only keep the patriotic ones.

The moral, dont trust the normal media for real info.