9/11: The Fake Opposition
A message by Peter Meyer
sent to a mailing list on 2003-11-27

Dick Eastman wrote:

>Kyle Hence has joined Judge in this exclusive-club of "responsible"
>investigators mentality — saying that the Physics911 group may be tainted
>because of contact with investigators who have — gasp! — drawn
>conclusions from careful examination and consideration [of] the data that exists
>and is available.
>I say Kyle Hence and John Judge are a new layer of coverup — the fake
>opposition that will be puffed by media and other moles in the investigation
>community — so that they and they alone will be giving the "responsible"
>critique of the 9-11 commission.

I think Dick is pretty much right on in his criticism of John Judge, Kyle Hence and 9/11 Citizens Watch. They appear to be part of what both Dick and Carol Valentine call "the fake opposition" (see Carol's article "Anti-war.com: Slyly Justifying The War On Islam" at http://www.serendipity.li/wot/anti-war.htm).

As Dick and Carol have made clear, the fake opposition pretends to be making genuine attempts to examine the official story and to ferret out the truth but their real purpose (for whatever ultimate reason) is to obscure the truth, to make sure that it never comes out, and in effect to support the official story.

Kyle demonstrates that he is a member of the fake opposition when he writes:

>I'd encourage those of you intent upon proving no Boeing hit the Pentagon >to put together an impeccable, comprehensive, thoroughly documented >professionally presented case and then presenting that in a formal Truth >Commission (should one be formed) context or directly to the 9/11 Commission >as 'due diligence'.

Implicit in Kyle's statement is the assertion that the official story may well be true, perhaps a Boeing 757 really did hit the Pentagon, as "our President" says it did.

In addition to the evidence and reasoning provided by Dick Eastman (see http://www.apfn.org/apfn/77_deastman1.htm) and myself (see http://www.serendipity.li/wtc.html#pentagon), the proof that whatever hit the Pentagon was not a Boeing 757 is provided by the weight of all the video evidence and argument assembled in the following web pages:

Hunt the Boeing! http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

Pentagon 9/11

The Pentagon Attack Frame-Up & Cover-Up

The Amazing Penta-Lawn

The Missing Wings

Pentagon Attack Evidence


Has Kyle not looked at this evidence that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon?

>I have viewed some of the photographic evidence myself (some flawed analysis >there, example: part of a fallen down ceiling/floor structure pictured as >a 1st floor column) and of course it raises serious doubts in me that >a large Boeing hit the Pentagon but so what! I'm afraid there is just >not enough hard evidence to break the spell of the official story there.

Note: "to break the spell". 9/11 was a magic show, put on by psy-ops specialists, and Kyle here shows that he knows this.

To disprove the official story it is not necessary to show that the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile, an F-16 fighter jet or anything else. It is sufficient merely to show that the Pentagon was *not* hit by a Boeing 757 and thus was *not* hit by the alleged AA flight 77. The evidence provided in the web pages referenced above provide overwhelming evidence that this is the case, and thus that the official story, in this respect is bogus. (And if it is bogus in this respect then what other parts are also bogus? Pretty much all of it, as other evidence shows.)

But for Kyle "there is just not enough hard evidence to break the spell of the official story there."

This is pathetic. Either Kyle really is incapable of evaluating evidence and coming to a conclusion or he is part of the fake opposition, as seems to be the case.

>This evidence does not exist in a political void and thus can't be legitmately >presented right now without the messenger being 'ghettoized' and stigmatized >and immediately relegated to the fringe.

This is rubbish. Evidence is evidence. To describe the presentation of *any* evidence concerning the identity of the perpetrators of the murder of thousands of Americans as illegitimate is an attempt to suppress that evidence, and shows that Kyle is an ally of Bush, Cheney and all the others who have attempted to suppress the evidence relating to what actually happened on September 11th, 2001.

The "9/11 Independent Commission" is clearly a fraud. Nipping at its heels, as Kyle is doing, is being an accomplice to the fraud.

I can see only three ways in which the truth of what happened on 9/11 will come out:

1. Massive and sustained protest demonstrations by outraged Americans. 100,000 people demonstrating night and day in Washington for several weeks would probably get results. But Americans are not Georgians, so this won't happen.

2. A military coup and the arrest of Bush, Cheney, Myers, Eberhardt, Perle and the other likely perpetrators of 9/11 would remove the authors of the cover-up from their present positions of power.

3. Sustained legal action, such as the suit brought against Bush by Ellen Mariani (see http://new.globalfreepress.com/article.pl?sid=03/11/26/1420225). The U.S. is a legalistic state. (The present administration is careful, like the Nazis of the 1930s, to get legislation passed which will make its past, present and future crimes "legal".) Lawyers willing to argue the evidence in court could get results. The major problems are (i) corrupt judges (including some in the Supreme Court) and (ii) intimidation of plaintiffs and lawyers representing them (none of whom wish to die prematurely).

So prospects for it being publicly acknowledged anytime soon that the official story is a deliberate lie seem bleak. This will not prevent a significant number of Americans from discovering this for themselves. How many, and what they might do as a result, is anyone's guess, but I imagine it gives Bush and Cheney nightmares.

Regards, Peter Meyer http://serendipity.li/

See also:

The World Trade Center Demolition and the So-Called War on Terrorism
Serendipity Home Page