THE BIJLMER CRASH - JOE VIALLS - CAUGHT IN A LIE.

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Bijlmer Crash - Joe Vialls - Caught In A Lie. Page 10 sur 14 aircraft that can be visually matched to an aircraft schematic diagram, or even mechanical parts that can be visually matched to items in the manufacturer's handbook. Look at the Bijlmer crash site again. Can you see any large or even small wing sections? Can you see engines, or perhaps part of the tail assembly? In fact, can any of you positively identify any single aircraft bolt, or human body part belonging to El Al Flight 1862? Joe shows the reader two of the smallest photos of the Bijlmer crash that he can produce, and then asks if the reader can spot any aircraft debris. In fact, as Joe knows perfectly well, flight 1862 smashed right through the apartment block and much of the wreckage was recovered some distance away, so there is next to no chance of spotting aircraft debris in photos of the apartment block. I should also mention, that there is next to no chance of spotting aircraft debris outside the Pentagon, as both the fuselage and wings smashed right through the outer wall and entered the building. No, absolutely not, because the dynamics of the crash and the fire that followed immediately afterwards, fragmented and burned more than 300 tons of aircraft completely beyond recognition. The only way we can be sure that the photographs show us the real crash site of El Al Flight 1862 is to rely on air traffic control records, eyewitnesses at the scene, and the multiple media reports that followed. Don't be stupid Joe. The aircraft did not just evaporate. In fact, like with (nearly) all aircraft crashes, the debris was gathered together (in this case in hanger 8 at Schiphol Airport) where it could be examined for clues regarding the crash. Sometimes, the aircraft is reconstructed from the debris. Also, just because you did not see aircraft debris in the one or two photos that you glanced at, does not mean that other photographs do not show such debris. In fact here is one: So we have a photo of the debris of El Al flight 1862. However, we do not have, even a single photo of the debris of flight 77. The Bush administration could easily provide such a photo, but refuses to do so. The fact that it has not done so, is very puzzling and also, very suspicious. It is also worth noting that the black box and voice-recorder of flight 1862 were both recovered from the debris, but that the voice-recorder "went missing". http://nerdcities.com/guardian/SeptemberEleventh/Bijlmer/ 17/11/2002
The Bijlmer Crash - Joe Vialls - Caught In A Lie. You see, the Bijlmer crash was subject to a cover up much like the one we see occurring in the US over the Pentagon crash. The Dutch government, like the US government, refused to conduct an investigation into the crash (until the revelation of further facts and public opinion forced their hand). Similarly, the black box and voicerecorder were recovered from flight 77, but the Bush administration has refused to make them available to investigators (or anybody else). This is very, very suspicious. Joe is right about one thing, the Bijlmer and Pentagon crashes are amazingly similar. Here are some quotes from Dutch sources concerning the results of the cover-up of the Bijlmer crash on Dutch society: "This, in addition to the inherent working style of the commission, will only perpetuate conspiracy theories." "This is a Calvinistic trait, this unbridled faith in the government that surely must have been put in place by God. However, the Bijlmer disaster has shown a completely different government, one that deserves deep suspicion." "The biggest casualty of the Bijlmer files is perhaps the Dutch citizenry's faith in their government." Page 11 sur 14 Expect to see similar developments in US society. So what is the commonality of the two crashes? Israel. It must be said that the French only showed American viewers the photographs it wanted them to see - a known and much abused media trick. Joe only showed American viewers the photographs he wanted them to see (the little ones at the beginning of his article) - a known and much abused media trick. The more comprehensive photographs circulated by the Pentagon shortly after the crash show conclusively that the aircraft penetrated three of the Pentagon "rings", i.e. rings of office blocks circling the center gardens, each with its own "garden" space inbetween. Such a structure is as difficult to penetrate by an aircraft, as a bullet fired through individual separated baffle plates on a firing range. I have neither the Cray supercomputer nor the time (nor the intellect) needed to do exact calculations, but I can assure you that the "object" which hit the Pentagon was of enormous weight travelling at very high velocity. In fact, it was American Airlines Flight 77. The only thing that allowed the French to put up this widespread myth in the first place, was the lack of a second aircraft directed at the Pentagon, which would certainly have been recorded by media cameras. The planners of the attack probably thought this unnecessary, because Flight 77 appears to have been largely a decoy. Joe, please expand on the "decoy theory". Insofar as it is possible for any analyst to have an opinion, it is my opinion (which is essentially worthless) that the only real attack [i.e. with a strategic motive and result] was the very public attack on the World Trade Center itself, home of the established financial order within the United States, otherwise known to conspiracy buffs and George Bush Senior as the "New World Order". There was no logical or aeronautical reason for the long time interval between the first strike of the WTC North Tower, and the second strike on the WTC South Tower. Given their known take off times, both aircraft could easily have been used in synchronized back-to -back sneak attacks only seconds apart, not unlike those on Pearl Harbor. In fact, from an air defense perspective, this would have been the most sensible course of action. The only viable reason to divert and delay United Flight 175 for so long, was to allow sufficient time for every network camera in New York to be focused on the twin towers. Once the sickening footage of Flight 175's attack run on the WTC South Tower had been seen in its raw form by the public, denial would be impossible for the Administration. Without this footage, no doubt the creative establishment media would have reported a "mid-air http://nerdcities.com/guardian/SeptemberEleventh/Bijlmer/ 17/11/2002
Page 1 and 2: The Bijlmer Crash - Joe Vialls - Ca
Page 9: The Bijlmer Crash - Joe Vialls - Ca

THE BIJLMER CRASH - JOE VIALLS - CAUGHT IN A LIE.

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?