Enver Masud, a retired international consulting engineer and author of 9/11 Unveiled, met me at Reagan National. He lives very close to the the airport – and just a few blocks away from the Pentagon.
On 9/11, shortly after the Pentagon was attacked, Enver hurried to the top of a nearby hill overlooking the side of the Pentagon that was allegedly hit by a plane…and saw no evidence of any plane crash.
From the airport, Enver drove me to that hilltop site. It offers an excellent view of the approach path allegedly taken by Flight 77.
From that hilltop, you can see the top 3 1/2 floors of the whole west side of the Pentagon. The bombing or crash or missile or whatever it was did absolutely no visible damage…at least not until the fire caused the top floors to collapse well after the initial attack.
Whatever happened at the Pentagon blasted a very small hole that affected only the two bottom floors. It left unbroken glass in the windows surrounding the hole. There were no damage marks where the engines would have struck. The giant tail, which would have hit the upper floors of the building, left no mark and broke no glass.
|A 757 disappeared into this hole. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA!!!!|
After viewing the alleged approach path at the Pentagon, I’m amazed that anyone ever accepted the official version. Why would suicide hijackers make such a difficult downhill approach over obstacle-strewn terrain?! And at over 500 mph – a speed that 757s probably can’t even achieve at that altitude, and certainly can’t achieve and still be controllable. And for what – to hit the relatively empty, newly-renovated West Wing of the building?! Any real kamikaze would obviously just dive into the huge, sprawling top of the building, aiming generally for the East Wing where all the top brass is stationed.
And the idea that Hani Hanjour, who couldn’t be trusted to solo in a Cessna, could pull off such a magnificently impossible bit of stunt flying, much less want to…it really boggles the mind. After viewing the site, it’s obvious to me that the story of how Flight 77 hit the Pentagon is even more ridiculous than NIST’s claim that Building 7 came down from ordinary office fires.
After touring the Pentagon attack scene with Enver Masud, I met with David Slesinger of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. David said that some of the architects and engineers had questions about my seemingly flamboyant, outrageous style of 9/11 activism. These people tend to be timid personalities, fearful of ridicule. They are afraid that bold actions by people like me – such as saying exactly what I think happened, naming the perpetrators, ridiculing the official story, pointing out that the rule of law is (at least temporarily) defunct and calling for an uprising, demanding justice at any price, using humor and hyperbole – will eclipse their more cautious and “scientific” approach, and impede the progress of the truth movement.
I told David that every 9/11 activist needs to read Lakoff’s classic Don’t Think of an Elephant. As Lakoff explains, every time you mention an issue that has been framed by the other side, it reinforces the other side’s frame, and works against your objectives.
Every time you mention 9/11, it tends to conjure up and reinforce the genocidal official story in the minds of non-truthers. Bringing the subject up actually fuels the genocide! This is especially true if you simply question 9/11 gently, or call for a new investigation. Your gentle questioning is no match for the tidal wave of psychic energy that the event unleashed, and the genocidal official myth that harnessed that energy.
The genocidal “19 hijackers” myth of 9/11 has been presented as a satisfactory, emotionally-charged narrative. The human mind thinks in narratives and associated emotional images. If it’s a complete, accepted narrative, it’s “real.” Questions and calls for new investigations will never undo it. The only way to fight a sacred narrative is (A) to profane that narrative – throw feces on it, smash its idols, heap ridicule and scorn and abuse on it, and so on; and (B) construct an equally engaging, equally emotionally-charged counter-narrative, complete with heroes, martyrs, and victims.
So while it’s fine for Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth to say “we don’t really know what happened, we just know that the official version is false,” that position is as politically impotent as it is scientifically immaculate.
We need AE911truth.org. But 9/11 activism must not be limited to echoing its position. 9/11 activists and communications specialists must insist that we DO know what happened on 9/11. We must insist that we DO know who did it, and why. We DO know the names of the the genocidal mass murderers: Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Larry Silverstein, Dov Zakheim, Scooter Libby, Douglas Feith, Benjamin Netanyahu, and so on. And we DO know who the real victims were: the Constitution of the USA, the millions of Muslims murdered in the 9/11-triggered genocide, and the religion and culture of Islam which is still under genocidal attack throughout the world.
Alongside constructing this intense, emotionally-charged counter-narrative (which has the merit of happening to be true), we should also lose no opportunity to ridicule the official version of 9/11 as loudly and derisively as possible. Ridicule, more than any other weapon, can rob sacred myths of their power.
To that end, I propose that instead of a violent general uprising, we stage a nonstop 9/11 “laugh riot.” Every time anyone brings up the subject of 9/11 in a way that expressly or implicitly accepts the official story – especially if it’s the usual sanctimonious BS – we shall erupt in furious barks of outraged laughter.
Every official 9/11 commemorative event should be infiltrated and disrupted by laugh riots. When one laughing person is ejected, the next person starts laughing…then the next.
Every time a politician or anyone else mentions 9/11 in a speech, he or she should be drowned out by waves of general hilarity.
After all, it is pretty hilarious that anyone ever believed the official story for even a split-second. (I half-believed it for two years, and will never stop laughing at myself.)
Will the bastards who did it get the last laugh?
Not if we can out-laugh and outlast them.