“Latest Foster Cover-Up Book Not Completely Worthless” Article draws retraction demand from “author.”

“Latest Foster Cover-Up Book Not Completely Worthless” Article draws retraction demand from “author.”

(As seen at WhatReallyHappened)

I also posted DC Dave’s post here (which I suggest is worthy of another read in case you missed it). More important (and entertaining) would be the newest additions to the comment section by Ms Peschmann, who is making her rounds demanding blog owners to delete or correct this valid critique of her work. As I tried to explain to her, I posted the review that DC Dave did. I did not write the review. Hugh Turley was also a participant within the first round of comments. It took her a very long time to figure out the obvious: that the three of us are different individuals.

It became quickly evident, however, that Ms Peschmann was obfuscating and/or ignoring direct questions of her. I finally came to the conclusion after considering another commentator’s questioning of her if she actually wrote the thing to begin with, that she may not have written it. Who knows? Why be so evasive? Why come here addressing us then complain about having to respond to direct questions during that exchange?

I have no proof that this person is actually who they claim they are (and frankly I don’t care). I did not read the book, but I have read the two authors who addressed her here. From the facts that Dave and Hugh present (and I would think that this site has one of the largest repositories of Dave’s Vince Foster and Forrestal writings around… next to Dave’s own site), I am fairly well versed in those particular murders. I am not a total novice.

I have done all I can to address her demands, by instructing her to contact DC Dave. But until Dave asks me to remove or modify that post, it remains. Furthermore, today I was copied on an email showing the Addendum added to the original post, so I did update the original post here. I do understand Dave’s critique and I personally find no fault, much less “unlawful” words within. I bow to his expertise and compared to what I have seen and heard about her book (one could also read some of the commentary at the Amazon page if so inclined), I still find her account unconvincing. Does she cover anything up? I don’t know, but nothing would surprise me after seeing her exchange here.

I’d say that she is complaining too much since she has taken ample opportunity here to express herself. Read it for yourself. Words and words and words typed freely in open exchange. Can any readers judge for themselves?

I wonder what changed her opinion after first writing this?

Hi David,

This is Marinka. I am glad you have decided that my Foster book, Following Orders, is not “completely worthless.” Thanks for taking the time to write your review. However, I would be remiss if I did not point out a few things and correct you.

Was it the dialogue that happened after?

She even thanked the guy. Now she complains?

From the WhatsReallyHappening post:

Peschmann has now sent a demand for retraction and apology to DC Dave and to the websites that cross-posted his critique, claiming that pointing out the factual inaccuracies in the book qualifies as defamation.

In fact, Peschmann ignores key facts that undermine the “Foster really did kill himself, just somewhere other than Fort Marcy Park” theory. It is documented that the gun found with the body in Fort Marcy Park did not in fact belong to Vince Foster. It is a documented fact that the FBI fraudulently manufactured the testimony of Lisa Foster to claim the dark blued gun found with the body was the “silver colored” (The FBI’s description) was the nickle-plated revolver Foster inherited from his father. Perschmann claims that Foster’s blood had dried by the time Foster’s body was found, yet when the body was moved, fresh blood flowed out of the wounds, staining Foster’s shirt! There is a medical report of a wound to Foster’s neck, which was then whited over!

It is not defamatory to point out errors in a published work.

 

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

The blog owner does not necessarily agree with the information published or with the original authors’ ideology, but supplies this information to foster comment, reporting, teaching and study. If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the right hand panel of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

Comment Policy:

Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Multiple links will automatically relegate your comment to the spam section, so keep that in mind as you post. 1st time commenters must receive Admin approval, but have free reign after that.

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

B’Man’s 2016 POTUS Watch: The Bride of Frankenfoods

The Monstrous Hillary Clinton

The Monstrous Hillary Clinton

We know she’s a monster, but how can it be that people are fooled into believing she is anything but another shill for giant corporations? Perhaps even some liberals are getting the real picture?

Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stands with Wall Street corporations in her support of their pushing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on Iowa farmers, Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement (CCI) Action Fund Executive Director Hugh Espey told Sputnik.

On Monday, liberal Democrats in Iowa called Clinton the “Bride of Frankenfood” over her support of GMOs and the agribusiness company Monsanto.

Her ties to Big Money are renowned. Even progressive Democrats understand it (yet they probably can’t find the gumption to fight it with any real vigor).

Clinton Foundation money-raising already is drawing attention. “To a lot of progressive Democrats, Clinton’s ties to corporate America are disturbing,” says Jack Pitney, a politics professor at Claremont McKenna College who once worked for congressional Republicans. Mrs. Clinton’s connections to companies, he says, “are a bonanza for opposition researchers because they enable her critics to suggest the appearance of a conflict of interest.”

Yeah? No kidding. And I haven’t even begun to delve into her Jewish/Israeli Big Money connections which are quite well known even among non-anti-semites (snark):

“Weeks after Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the State Department objected to a proposed consultancy arrangement offered to Bill Clinton by media mogul Haim Saban, citing concerns about conflict of interest. Nevertheless, public records show that Saban’s nonprofit gave millions to the Clinton Foundation throughout Hillary Clinton’s tenure.

Saban, a billionaire best known for creating Mighty Morphin Power Rangers, has dual U.S.-Israeli citizenship and has spent heavily to support Israel. “His greatest concern, he says, is to protect Israel, by strengthening the United States-Israel relationship,” The New Yorker noted in a 2010 profile of Saban. At a conference in Israel, the article said, Saban had outlined three methods for influencing American politics: “make donations to political parties, establish think tanks, and control media outlets.”

[…]

Yet between 2009 and 2013, as Hillary Clinton served as secretary of state, the Saban Family Foundation paid the Clinton Foundation more than $7 million, and listed $30.5 million in “grants and contributions approved for future payment,” according to nonprofit records filed with the Internal Revenue Service. It’s unclear whether there was any overlap between the $7 million paid and $30.5 million committed to the Clinton Foundation in those years.”

But what about the “opposition” (he said in jest knowing they serve the same basic tribal money interests)? How do they see her Big Money connections, especially the GMO support?

Funny you might ask. Seems like she has some very strange bed-fellows (at least when Rush Limpballs isn’t bedding Dominican Republic fellows)

The Bride of Frankenfoods and Another Monster

The Bride of Frankenfoods and Another Monster

CALLER: No. I live in a city. (chuckles) I live in a liberal county surrounded by liberals….But people have to understand that a lot of the stuff that is not organic is sprayed with a lot of poisons.

RUSH: Yeah.

CALLER: A lot of bad stuff.

RUSH: Yeah, I know. That’s what I eat.

CALLER: These GMO foods — you know, the genetically modified stuff?

RUSH: That’s what I eat.

Silly me. I thought his idiocy was due to all the Oxycontin, not GMO foods.

As for Rushillary, I think they make a nice couple, don’t you?

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Multiple links will automatically relegate your comment to the spam section, so keep that in mind as you post.

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

Largest Known U.S. Vietnam War Atrocity

Largest Known U.S. Vietnam War Atrocity

But Ignored by U.S. News Media

by DC Dave

Reporting on a recent speech by Vietnamese Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung in which the Vietnamese leader said that Americans committed “countless barbarous crimes” in the Vietnam War, The Washington Post’s Adam Taylor made this further observation:

nickturse

And while My Lai is acknowledged, some say that the massacre was only notable because of its scale, and that smaller-scale killings of civilians by U.S. troops were alarmingly commonplace. In his book “Kill Anything That Moves,” journalist Nick Turse argues that American authorities were aware of similar killings and often allowed them.

“The indiscriminate killing of South Vietnamese noncombatants — the endless slaughter that wiped out civilians day after day, month after month, year after year throughout the Vietnam War — was neither accidental nor unforeseeable,” Turse wrote.

Taylor finds Prime Minister Nguyen’s statement remarkable considering the current relatively stable and friendly relationship between the United States and Vietnam, though understandable in light of the true history of the war that Americans still know very little about.

What I find remarkable is that such a strong article as the one that Taylor has written should appear in the usually warmongering Washington Post. It is the failure of The Post and the mainstream media in general to tell us the full truth about the Vietnam War—in spite of the recently cultivated belief that it actually went too far in doing so—that Prime Minister Nguyen’s charges should sound so shocking.

998188Although this is the first I have heard of Turse’s book, and have not read it, from the reviews I gather that it tells the story that we at the North Carolina Veterans for Peace attempted to get out when I was a graduate student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. When Lt. William Calley was charged in the My Lai massacre, we put on a program on campus in which a number of members of our group described similar atrocities to My Lai that they had either participated in or witnessed. When the Vietnam Veterans against the War (VVAW) held its Winter Soldier Investigation in Detroit in early 1971 with many more eyewitness atrocity stories, they sent out films of the testimony of soldiers to sympathetic organizations around the country. We set up an outdoor screen on the “brick pit” next to the undergraduate library and showed the testimony night after night in the summer of 1971. The students generally ignored us—the government had taken the wind out of the sails of the antiwar movement on campus with the draft lottery in December of 1969—and VVAW was cold-shouldered by the news media. This is from Wikipedia:

Mainstream media all but ignored the Winter Soldier Investigation. The East Coast papers refused to cover the hearings, other than a New York Times story a week later. The local field reporter for the Times, Jerry M. Flint, commented with uninterest, “this stuff happens in all wars.” In a February 7, 1971 article he wrote that “much of what they said had been reported or televised before, even from Vietnam. What was different here was the number of veterans present.” Several of the VVAW representatives speculated that there was an “official censorship blackout,” and they would express this theory later in their newsletter.

A few articles that were sympathetic to the veterans appeared in lesser-known publications, and Pacifica Radio, known for its left-wing perspective, gave the event considerable coverage. The CBS television crew that showed up were impressed, but only three minutes made it to the nightly news on the first night—three minutes that were “mostly irrelevant to the subject”, according to VVAW.

Because of the general blackout, there’s a pretty good chance that many people even so far off the establishment reservation as to be reading my material are learning about the Winter Soldier Investigation for the first time right now. The fact of the matter is that U.S. military tactics in Vietnam, in their wanton destructiveness and ineffectiveness, were very much like a person attempting to swat flies in a house using a sledgehammer.

Upon closer examination we see that Adam Taylor’s revealing article is not so anomalous as it first appears. It would, indeed, have been amazing to read such revelations in the pages of The Washington Post, but it never appeared among its pages. In what has become an ever more frequently used tactic of buying credibility without spreading useful information widely, The Post only put the Taylor article on its website, and, in all likelihood, they buried it away there.

Biggest Atrocities from the Air

VIETNAM AIR BOMBINGS

There is also a shortcoming in the quote from the article that we have used, and it is one that is shared by our veterans group at UNC and by what I have seen of the Winter Soldier Investigation. Citing Nick Turse’s book, Taylor says that My Lai differs from countless other atrocities in Vietnam in that it was on a larger scale. Another big difference between My Lai and other atrocities is that it was perpetrated on the ground and not from the air. The testimony at Chapel Hill and at Detroit came largely from conscience-stricken soldiers—mainly enlisted men—who saw their victims, often face to face. The confession that Hugh Turley overheard at the S & J Tavern in Riverdale Park, MD, of a man who had killed women and children upon the orders of his superiors is fairly typical. Those who slaughtered wholesale from the air—the American way of killing—were career military officers and in most cases they never saw their victims. For the most part, those perpetrators have not broken ranks and they have not been overly weighted down by conscience.

There is one big exception. It was reported originally, to my knowledge, in an obscure book from my home county.

Mary Lewis Deans is a Nash County, NC, writer who married a neighbor of mine in the county when they were both in high school. He later went on to become a career Air Force officer. I recall reading her columns in the weekly Nashville Graphic, dateline Bangkok, in the 1970s when he was the U.S. Air Force attaché in Thailand. In 1996, she edited and published a little book entitled Salute to Veterans: Oral Histories from Veterans and their Relatives, gathered by the Nash County Cultural Center’s oral history project. The one that caught my eye was from the Vietnam experience of then-Lt. Colonel James Hildreth—retired in his wife’s hometown of Spring Hope—in which he described the obliteration of an unthreatening Vietnamese village of more than a thousand residents:

An Unacceptable Target

Told by James Robert “Cotton” Hildreth

I was sixteen when I went into the Merchant Marines. I served sixteen months as a Ship’s Radio Officer. When I became eighteen, I joined the Army and served a hitch as an enlisted man, then got out of service. I was called back into service when the Korean War started. I went into the Air Force in 1952 and became a fighter pilot, and it was my career for the next thirty years.

For the next ten years, I served as a flight commander in several fighter squadrons, flying the F-84, F-86, F-100 and F-105. This was the most exciting, rewarding, and enjoyable ten years of my life. During the hottest period of the Cold War we developed and exercised world-wide deployment for our fighter aircraft, using aerial refueling, and responded to numerous military threats with a show of force in such places as the Taiwan Straits and Lebanon in the Middle East.

I was assigned to Fighter Requirements in the Pentagon when the military buildup in Vietnam began, and I volunteered to go. I think we all wanted to go. It was what we had trained to do since we took the oath. When my request was approved, I called my friend, Dudley Foster, in Rated Officer Assignments in Personnel and told him I had been released from my Pentagon tour and wanted an F-105 assignment to Southeast Asia. He told me that since I had not flown F-105 in three years I would have to retrain in the F-105 and that I would have to wait five or six months for a school slot. This was in 1966, and I didn’t think the war would last that long.

I asked, “Well, what aircraft do you have that I can go over in now?” And added, “I don’t care what it is. I’m ready to go.”

A-1J_Skyraider_VA-176_Vietnam_1966

An A-1J of VA-176 loaded with ordnance for a mission in Vietnam in 1966.

He said, “I just had a cancellation in an A-1 assignment.”

I didn’t know what an A-1 was. He told me it was a conventional Navy attack aircraft that the Marines used in the Korean War for close-air support. The Marines were converting their attack units to A-4s and giving the A-1s to the Air Force to use for Air Commando missions, principally close-air support, search and rescue, and covert mission he couldn’t talk about. It was really not what I had in mind, but I wanted to go so badly I took the assignment.

I arrived at Pleiku in the Central Highlands of South Vietnam as Commander of the First Air Commando Squadron in March, 1967, and ended my tour a year later during the Tet Offensive.

How do I feel about the war in Vietnam?

I have mixed feelings, mostly bad. From the onset of the buildup in Vietnam, it was clear that there was no military solution to the conflict. We should never have become so extensively involved. The volume of ordnance we expended over an area about the size of California was more than the total ordnance expended in all the previous armed conflicts in the history of our country, and it had no appreciable effect on the outcome in Southeast Asia. The total of all the targets destroyed was not worth the life of one of my pilots, and I lost eight of them in ten months and twelve of my twenty-two assigned aircraft.

It was difficult to show the bean-counters and political warriors in Washington positive military results for all our casualties and materiel losses. So the American military leadership in South Vietnam determined that bodies destroyed was a good gauge. BODY-COUNT became the measure of a ground commander’s success. It should not then have been surprising that this policy led to the civilian massacre at the village of My Lai.

A-1E Skyraider aircraft of the 34th Tactical Group, based at Bien Hoa, South Vietnam, fly in formation over South Vietnam on way to target on June 25, 1965.  (U.S. Air Force photo)

A-1E Skyraider aircraft of the 34th Tactical Group, based at Bien Hoa, South Vietnam, fly in formation over South Vietnam on way to target on June 25, 1965. (U.S. Air Force photo)

The vast majority of the A-1 missions were in Laos: flying armed reconnaissance of North Vietnamese infiltration routes into South Vietnam, search and rescue missions for downed air crews, and covert support for special ground forces operations.

Our aircraft was very slow and heavily armed. I mention this because all of my previous experience had been in high-performance jet fighters where the pilot never really sees the people who die in the target he destroys. In the A-1 you actually see the people shooting at you, and, at the time, feel the satisfaction of knowing you’ve killed someone who was trying to kill you.

One particular mission is as vivid in my memory now as the day it happened. I was leading a flight of two A-1s on an armed reconnaissance mission, but shortly after take-off we were diverted to a target on the coast of I Corps (northern quarter of South Vietnam.) On arriving in the target area, we contacted the FAC (forward air controller) who pointed out the target. It was a huge village of three or four hundred houses, probably twelve to fifteen hundred people. It was between the main north-south highway and the ocean, a pretty, clean village. I asked the FAC why the village was a target.

The FAC said, “That is a Vietcong village.”

I said, “How do you know its a Vietcong village?”

He said, “Well we saw three Vietcong run in there.”

Across the road from the village was a rice paddy.

He said, “We saw them run out of the rice paddy when we flew over, and they ran into the village.”

I said, “And you want us to wipe out this whole village to get three Vietcong?” How do you know they were Vietcong? Were they armed?”

He said, “They had on black pajamas.”

All of the farmers working in the fields had on black pajamas. That was their dress. And they carried tools like rakes and hoes.

He said, “They were armed.”

I said, “How do you know they weren’t carrying rakes and hoes?”

He said, “Don’t argue with me. I’ve got the provincial governor in the back seat, and he says that is a Vietcong village.”

I said, “Well, I’ll go down and look around and see if I can draw any fire.”

So we went down and flew over real low and slow. There were children in the courtyard, smiling and waving at us. This village had obviously been there for years, and it had never been touched. I pulled back up; and I said, “Okay, what are your instructions?”

He said, “The wind is blowing off-shore; so put your napalm down on that first row of houses, and the wind will carry the fire across the entire village.”

So I said, “”Fine.”

USAF Douglas A-1 Skyraider drops napalm and white phosphorous during the Vietnam War

USAF Douglas A-1 Skyraider drops napalm and white phosphorous during the Vietnam War

I pulled around and told my wingman to come in from one side and I would attack from the other. We would start our attack from opposite corners. I was coming in toward the corner hut. I looked up at the other end, and he had moved over the road and dropped his napalm on the road. As I approached my release point, a woman with a tiny baby strapped on her back, holding the hand of a small child three or four years old, came running from the hut. I pulled my aircraft over and dropped the napalm in a ditch beside the highway.

The FAC screamed and raised holy hell because he had this governor in the aircraft with him. He said, “You know I’m going to report you for this!”

I said, “You don’t have to. I’ll be on the ground before you are, and I’ll report myself.”

When we landed, my wingman walked over to my aircraft and said, “Sir, I have three small grandchildren, and I could never have faced them again if I had followed those orders.” He said he didn’t want to fly any more combat missions. Later, I had him transferred to a unit with an airborne command and control mission.

I went into Squadron Operations and called the Command Center at Seventh air Force and talked to the director, a brigadier general I had served with several years before. I told him what happened.

He said, “Damn, Cotton, don’t you know what’s going on? That village didn’t pay their taxes. That lieutenant colonel, a provincial commander, is teaching them a lesson.”

On returning from an interdiction mission several days later, we flew over the target area. The village had been totally destroyed. Nothing but a large, black, burned area remained. I’m sure when the FAC got a fast-mover (high-performance jet) on the target and destroyed the village the report read: Target 100 percent destroyed, body-count 1200 KBA (killed by air) confirmed.

I’m a grandfather now, and I can’t watch my grandchildren at play or carry them in my arms without thinking of that village in Vietnam.

grandchildren

I put the story on my web site originally on June 10, 1998. To date, no one in what could be called the mainstream U.S. news media

'Yes, [because] you don’t see the people.’

‘Yes, [because] you don’t see the people.’

has touched it. In July 2010, with my assistance in finding Hildreth’s phone number, my friend Turley was able to conduct an interview. He entitled his article, “The Wingman and the Village.” In his article Turley revealed that Hildreth had retired as a Major General.

It’s not in his article, but Turley tells me that he asked Hildreth who gave the order to destroy the village. Hildreth declined to name the man, saying, “I still have friends in the Pentagon.” Turley’s article’s big contribution to the story came with Hildreth’s response to another question: “When asked if he would have destroyed the village had he been flying an F-105 supersonic fighter-bomber, Hildreth replied coolly, Yes, [because] you don’t see the people.’ ”

And that’s why America’s biggest atrocities have been, and continue to be, perpetrated from the air, and it’s also why we’ll probably never even hear about most of them, and no one will ever be punished for them.

Drone-attack

David Martin

May 4, 2015

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Multiple links will automatically relegate your comment to the spam section, so keep that in mind as you post.

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

About that Obama “Movement”

About that Obama “Movement”

by DC Dave

ClownRoyalty Rampant misgovernment, I think we can all agree, is the bane of the human race. Only a few misguided voices to the contrary, the United States is hardly an exception, quite the opposite, in fact. The worst fruit of that ongoing U.S. misgovernment so far is well summed up by Canadian philosopher, John McMurtry:

In the US’s so-called War on Terror, by far the greatest and most systematic terrorization of civilians is in fact perpetrated by the US state itself. Unarmed citizens are murdered across the world as ‘collateral damage’, ‘illegal enemy combatants’ or other license of impunity. The US state conceives itself as above international law along with ally Israel, but this reality is taboo to report and so too all the killing and terrorization of civilians. One can truly say that “the historical record demonstrates the US is provably guilty of continual lawless mass murder of civilians across the world”…

Against this murderous backdrop, the inconvenience experienced by Hyattsville Life and Times columnist Hugh Turley on March 21 so that President Barack Obama and his wife Michelle could watch her Princeton alma mater’s women’s basketball team play in the NCAA tournament might look like a very small thing, indeed, but we should see it as part of the same big picture. He and thousands of others were made late (including possibly for airline flights causing them to miss them) because the main thoroughfare of Route 1 was blocked off so the small armada of vehicles that go with the president could traverse the 11 or so miles from the White House to the University of Maryland’s Xfinity Center. Turley begins:

One recent Saturday, I was driving my wife to an appointment in Laurel, 30 minutes away. We left our Hyattsville home allowing enough time to arrive 15 minutes early. As we passed through College Park on U.S. Route 1 going north, I could see police were blocking the road ahead. I turned at Greenbelt Road to take another route. Near the beltway I tried to get back onto Route 1 and realized police were blocking every street and driveway. Traffic on the neighborhood streets was now jammed in every direction. I turned on the car radio to hear a traffic report and learned the Baltimore Washington Parkway (MD 295), Kenilworth Avenue (MD 201), part of Interstate Highway 495, and U.S. Route 1, were closed for “an official movement.”

unnamed

Local police block streets for a motorcade during an “official movement” near the University of Maryland. Photo courtesy Hugh Turley.

“Who do these people think they are, disrupting the lives of the American people?” Turley concludes his article entitled, “An Imperial Traffic Jam.” 01125110.Par.89380.ImageFileSome other questions come to mind. What were they thinking? Don’t they know how bad this looks? Is it a good idea for someone whose position depends upon public approval to demonstrate such a callous disregard for the well being of his fellow citizens, needlessly inflicting hardship upon large numbers of them so that he and his wife might experience some frivolous gratification? Think of how you feel when you are sitting in a traffic jam and a car rushes by you on the shoulder so that he can get ahead while at the same time making the jam just that much worse for everyone else and multiply it many times over, and that is the feeling inflicted on people by the Obamas for their own very unofficial business. Upon reflection, though, what we see here is not the act of self-indulgent thoughtlessness that it might appear upon first blush. If one thinks of it as simply another opportunity to make us feel like subjects instead of citizens and to reinforce the notion that we are besieged and “security concerns” trump everything else, then the apparently callous action make some sense. If this were all about the whims and convenience of Barack and Michelle, there’s a lot quicker and easier way for the Obama’s to have gone to the game. They could have taken the presidential helicopter. They might have been attacked for abusing the perquisites of the office, but pointing out how preferable it is to the alternative could have easily deflected that. * the-royal-obamas The central problem is that our propaganda press is all part of the selling job for that alternative. Thus we see that Turley’s is the lonesome voice in the Fourth Estate calling any attention at all to this most recent outrage inflicted upon ordinary people. The completely unnecessary permanent blocking of the central avenue of Pennsylvania Avenue for “security reasons” seriously interferes with the smooth movement of traffic through the heart of the District of Columbia, but not a murmur of protest has been heard from the news media. Similarly, they have accepted with equanimity the “siege decorations” that increasingly blemish the nation’s capital. The former was done to reinforce the complete absurdity that Timothy McVeigh’s truck bomb caused all the damage to the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City and the latter is for the purpose of hammering into our minds the notion that terrorists of the false flag 9/11 stripe are out to get us.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

We demonstrated what a sham those “security measures” are around the city with our article “Homeland Insecurity?” in which we show that the big Homeland Security building, which happens to be off the tourism track, has no such external security and is, in fact, cluttered in front by numerous exotic food trucks every weekday around noon. tsa We have said more than once before that the various inconveniences and invasions upon our privacy and our dignity such as we undergo at airports are all just for show to reinforce the official terrorist-siege narrative, but the road blockages for “official movements” might have an even more ominous and sinister motive. We might consider them of a piece with the lockdown that occurred around Boston in pursuit of the Boston Marathon bombing patsies, the little publicized FEMA camp roundup drills that recently took place in Fort Lauderdale, Florida… … and the upcoming Operation Jade Helm, in which some 1,200 elite military personnel will treat a number of states in the Southwest as enemy territory to be infiltrated. Jade Helm Think of it all as practice for the controllers and acclimation for the controlees. If we might paraphrase John Donne: Never send to know upon whom the movement falls; it falls upon thee. * It might have been a bit slower like the rest of us go—Mapquest tells us that it’s about 30 minutes from the White House to the Xfinity Center with normal traffic—but the First Couple could have traveled incognito quite securely like Hillary Clinton did across the Midwest in her van this week. David Martin April 15, 2015

Follow @BuelahMan BuelaHuh? Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Multiple links will automatically relegate your comment to the spam section, so keep that in mind as you post.

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

“Hijacker” Instructor Described Woeful Skills

“Hijacker” Instructor Described Woeful Skills

Guest column by Hugh Turley

An edited version of this article was published in the September 2008 Hyattsville (MD) Life and Times.

This month at the Pentagon a memorial will be dedicated to the 184 victims who died on September 11, 2001. One of those victims was my high school ROTC instructor, Max Beilke. On March 29, 1973, Max Beilke was the “official last man” to leave Vietnam when the United States was ending its direct military presence in Vietnam.

When tragedy struck the morning of September 11 people wondered what had happened.   The names and the number of victims would not be known for weeks.natsios-flight77

The following day The Washington Post described how American Airlines Flight 77 approached the Pentagon, “The unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver…aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill. Someone even knew how to turn off the transponder, a move that is considerably less than obvious.”

Within days the names of 19 terrorist hijackers were publicized.

On September 16, Hani Hanjour was named as the hijacker and pilot aboard American Airlines Flight 77. The Washington Post said, “Federal records show Hani Hanjoor [sic] obtained a commercial pilot’s license in April of 1999 with a rating to fly commercial jets”.

When Hanjour’s name appeared in the press, Marcel Bernard, the chief flight instructor at the Freeway Airport in nearby Mitchellville, Md., contacted authorities and reported that Hanjour had visited the airport.

hanjour

Hani Hanjour

Hanjour went into the air in a Cessna 172 three times with instructors in August of 2001, a scant month before the attack on the Pentagon, for a “check out” to rent an airplane, Bernard told the Hyattsville Life and Times. “Insurance requires that a person must be checked out before they can rent a plane at the airport,” Bernard said. “Hanjour’s skills were so poor we would not rent a plane to him.”

The Prince George’s Journal [Sept. 18, 2001] reported that Hanjour did not finish a flight school in Arizona in 1996 “because instructors felt he was not capable.” Bernard recalled that Hanjour did have a commercial pilot’s license that had been issued in Arizona, but he was certain Hanjour did not have what is called a “Type Rating,” which is necessary to fly commercial jets.

Not only are the requisite piloting skills different, but a certified commercial jet pilot must be proficient in English. Bernard said that Hanjour’s English speaking skills were so poor he “could barely understand him on the telephone.”

Bernard said it is possible a person with some flying experience, even a poor pilot like Hanjour, could steer a plane in the air and crash it into a building. But, he said,

“[Hanjour’s] skills were so poor he may have been aiming for the White House when he hit the Pentagon.”

Bernard was asked about the Post’s report that “aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill” and executed a pivot that “reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver.”

“That’s difficult to believe,” he responded. “I don’t believe a lot that I read in the newspaper.”

He then asked rhetorically, “Whose opinions are those, and who are the unnamed aviation sources?”

Pentagon911memorial

National 9/11 Pentagon Memorial

 

It is fitting that a memorial should be dedicated to all the innocent victims who perished on that fateful day. It is also proper that all of our questions be answered.

April 6, 2015

 

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Multiple links will automatically relegate your comment to the spam section, so keep that in mind as you post.

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

Latest Foster Cover-Up Book Not Completely Worthless

Latest Foster Cover-Up Book Not Completely Worthless

by DC Dave

Purported journalist Marinka Peschmann is not exactly an experienced researcher on the 51dOgw0PmzLsubject and it shows in her thin little 2012 volume, Following Orders: The Death of Vince Foster, Clinton White House Lawyer. One would think that this 5×8 inch paperback with only 132 pages of actual text would at least be spare with any unnecessary verbiage, but in fact the opposite is the case. It’s full of passages in which she and former Clinton White House legal office aide Linda Tripp just chew the fat, speculating about one thing or another. Not until her 12th and last chapter does she come through with her really batty theory of what actually happened the day Foster died.

“His job is clearly to play right-wing shepherd and to herd his assigned flock away from the corruption that envelops both the Democrats and the Republicans as well as our ruling media elite,” I wrote in my review of Richard Poe’s Hillary’s Secret War: The Clinton Conspiracy to Muzzle Internet Journalists. It’s the same with Peschmann, except that she seems both to be on, and to aim for, an IQ level a few notches lower than Poe’s. Poe was able to get a big blurb by Ann Coulter right on his dust jacket. The best Peschmann can get is a plug from Gateway Pundit, Jim Hoft, a favorite whipping boy of the Fake Left web site, Media Matters, where Ben Dimiero suggests that Hoft might be “the dumbest man on the Internet.”

The following passage, which, short as it is, takes up half of the book’s penultimate page, tells you who the Peschmann audience is supposed to be, and it is surely not those she pretends to address:

A note to my secular, atheist, agnostic, and humanist friends and readers

Marinka1

Marinka Peschmann

We are all free to believe or to not believe in God. With or without the Bible verses, Following Orders is the same story. If you have a problem with references to God and to Christianity skip over the scriptures that open each chapter. When reporting on politicians who adhere to an ideology dedicated to Lucifer, I believe it is prudent to counter Lucifer with God. That said, I think it is fair to say we are all flawed. I also believe that a liar and a hypocrite, be it a person “of faith” or a “non-believer,” is still a liar and a hypocrite just like corruption, whether it appears on the right or the left of the political spectrum, is still corruption. (emphasis Peschmann’s)

Peschmann never explains how she developed such a cozy relationship with Tripp, the woman who brought Foster his last lunch, a cheeseburger, but one gets some idea of the degree of the coziness, as well as a feel for the reading experience that one is in for, with this early passage in the first chapter:

Linda Tripp

Linda Tripp

With Cleo, Linda’s golden retriever dog, gently asleep at her usual spot, in front of the living room couch, I faced the computer and clicked print. Page after page rolled out documenting the events of July 20, 1993—that was the day White House deputy counsel to the president of the United States, Vincent Walker Foster Jr., was found dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head in Fort Marcy Park in McLean, Virginia. It was the highest-ranking suicide in government since 1949, when President Truman’s secretary of defense, James Forrestal, committed suicide by throwing himself from a sixteenth floor window to his death from the Bethesda Naval Hospital.

hillary_vince

Vince Foster & Hillary Clinton

She’s still toeing the prevailing propaganda line on Forrestal (who was no longer defense secretary at the time of his death) some eight years after this writer had blown it out of the water, and it really should not surprise one to find that she really does pretty much the same with Foster. In the Foster case it is the propaganda line of the Fake Right.

We heard it early on, coming from the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Jerry Falwell. Yes, it might have been a suicide, they agreed, but it didn’t happen like we have been told. There had to have been something about it that was terribly embarrassing to the Clintons. Hillary and Vince had a love nest, they suggested, somewhere in Northern Virginia. Perhaps Foster killed himself there, and the body was transported to the park rolled up in a carpet and dumped. It is consistent with the thrust of reporter Christopher Ruddy’s work before he defected to the Clinton camp, and that is the theory that she is marshaling support for with the following passage:

According to an independent Foster investigation conducted by Vincent Scalice, a veteran New York City Police homicide investigator, and an expert in crime scene reconstruction, identification, and forensic analysis, and Fred D. Santucci, a Forensic Photographer and Crime Scene Expert: “Carpet-type fibers of various colors which were found on almost all of Foster’s clothing was clearly indicative of the fact that his body probably was in contact with one or more carpets. This evidence raises the possibility that his body may have been in a prone position, and/or his body may have been transported while in contact with some type of carpeting.”

She leaves out one name here. Richard Saferstein, author of the popular textbook, Criminalisitics: An Introduction to Forensic Science, was also a member of the “independent investigation” team.

Actually, there was nothing really independent about it. It was all set up by Christopher Ruddy. He roped me into the “reconstruction of the crime scene” to play the role of the Vince Foster corpse because, he said, I was the right height. I protested that I was some 30 pounds heavier than Foster and therefore unsuited for the role, but Ruddy insisted. I think his purpose was simply to get me emotionally invested in the snake oil that he was selling, which I never found all that persuasive, no matter how “expert” the people might have been, because the reconstruction took place earlier in the year than when Foster died, and conditions would have been completely different. Furthermore, all that evidence of carpet fibers on Foster’s clothing came from the FBI crime lab when, contrary to what one might learn from Ruddy or Peschmann, the FBI was, itself, deeply implicated in the Foster cover-up.

Peschmann has this lone endnote (#250) at the end of her paragraph: “Vincent J. Scalice, ‘What really happened,’ access online at: http://whatreallyhappened.com/content/vince-foster-documents-reveal-judges-deliberations-death.”

Whoa! Wait a minute! How in the world did that get there? There’s nothing about Scalice et al. in the referenced article. What’s there is the very illuminating work of Foster researcher Hugh Turley, which appears on this writer’s web site. Here we reprint it in its entirety:

71d8tzaKzbL

Documents Reveal Judges’ Deliberations on a Death

By Hugh Turley

Vincent Foster, former president Bill Clinton’s deputy White House counsel, died nearly 18 years ago, and his death was ruled a suicide. But recent research has revealed that the judges who had appointed the independent counsel investigating his death were worried about “be[ing] charged as conspirators in the cover-up,” in the words of Judge John Butzner.

Butzner was part of a three-judge panel on the Special Division of the District of Columbia Circuit that had appointed Kenneth Starr to investigate several matters relating to the Clinton’s Whitewater land deal, an inquiry that grew to include Foster’s 1993 death.

Notes between the now-deceased Butzner and his colleagues Peter Fay and David Sentelle are part of the collection of Butzner’s papers at the University of Virginia’s law library. They show discussion about whether to include the testimony of Whitewater grand jury witness Patrick Knowlton, who had been at Fort Marcy Park the day Foster’s body was found.  As a passerby, he testified that Foster’s Honda was not at the park at the time of death.  Foster therefore could not have driven to the park in his car as claimed by Starr.

Knowlton asked the judges to include additional evidence based on official records contradicting Starr’s report: Other witnesses did not see Foster’s car, the gun found was not Foster’s, there was a bullet hole in Foster’s neck, crime scene photographs and X-rays had disappeared.   Knowlton provided evidence he was the victim of witness intimidation by Starr’s staff.

On Sept. 24, 1997, Judge Sentelle sent his colleagues Knowlton’s motion to include comments and factual information as an appendix to the report on Foster’s death. Sentelle told them: “The question of what to do with his comments is not an easy one. … If I were forced to decide the question alone, it would be my inclination to deny the motion.”

Starr Knowlton

Starr & Knowlton Click to see how this meeting came about.

Judge Fay disagreed with Sentelle. “[Knowlton] does comment on specific findings and conclusions in the report,” he argued.  “He contradicts specific factual matters and takes issue with the very basics of the report filed by the [Independent Counsel].”

The following day Butzner concurred. “I suspect if we deny the motion we will be charged as conspirators in the cover-up,” he wrote. “I suggest we let the motion and the attachments speak for themselves.”

That afternoon, Sentelle faxed his colleagues a message that, after reviewing their memos, he had changed his mind and agreed to draft an order granting the motion. So on Sept. 26, the court ordered that Knowlton’s comments and evidence be included in Starr’s report.  On Sept. 29, Starr filed a motion appealing the order. It was denied the next day, marking the first time in history that an Independent Counsel was ordered to include in his report evidence of a cover-up by his own investigators.

After Starr’s motion was denied and before the report was made public, Knowlton and his attorney visited the Associated Press office to show the reporter on the case the evidence contradicting Starr that had been ordered part of the final report.

They were not prepared for his response. “[The reporter] told us the story was already written and [the cause of death] was suicide,” Knowlton told the Hyattsville Life & Times. “We did not believe the press could ignore the court-ordered attachment.”

Now, for 13 years, the American press has not reported on the Knowlton appendix, and the attachments did not “speak for themselves” as Butzner envisioned.  But the press has reported the latest news about Kenneth Starr — he will become the president of Baylor University this June.

This article appeared originally in the April 2010 Hyattsville (MD) Life and Times.  All the documents described in the article, including the Knowlton appendix ordered included with Kenneth Starr’s report over his strenuous objection—and the objection, itself—can be found here.  The complete Starr report on Foster’s death, including the vital Knowlton appendix, is hereThe Washington Post, however, protecting Starr’s reputation in a manner that the three judges, to their credit, refused to do, have what it claims to be the full Starr report here.  In an act worthy of Pravda in the old Soviet Union, The Post has censored out the Knowlton appendix.

David Martin

April 14, 2010

Peschmann’s Scalice passage appears on page 106 of her book. At this point the reader might as well just continue with his Internet reading and ditch the book. The Knowlton appendix referred to—by dint of the judges’ decision as much a part of the official report as the work of Starr’s team—thoroughly destroys Peschmann’s thesis. She guesses that Foster, after going out and eating some more somewhere, came back to the White House shortly after 5 o’clock and shot himself in his office with his own gun and was then transported to Fort Marcy Park and dumped there by panicked fellow White House lawyers working late.

VINCE_FOSTER_HANDGUNWe learn from Knowlton’s document, though, that the widow, Lisa, was shown a silver gun and told that it was the one found at the park, when the gun found at the park was black and therefore not the one that the family brought up from Arkansas. The gun, then, appears to have been planted. We also learn that the one wound seen at the park by witnesses was to Foster’s neck—an apparent bullet entrance wound—and no one there saw any exit wound in the back of the head, much less the half-dollar-sized one that was shown in the autopsy sketch. The missing fatal bullet that Peschmann makes a big fuss about was likely not missing at all but still in Foster’s head. The “malfunctioning” X-ray machine that failed to detect the bullet was not malfunctioning at all; the corrupt autopsy doctor, James Beyer, simply falsified the autopsy report.

The best evidence strongly indicates that Foster was driven to Fort Marcy Park—which happens, by coincidence or not, to FT MARCY PARKbe quite near CIA headquarters—where he was surprised by someone who pressed a small caliber pistol to his neck and fired it upward into his brain. That is the scenario strongly suggested by Starr’s lead investigator, Miguel Rodriguez, in his resignation letter and his memorandum for the record.

Peschmann makes no mention of Rodriguez. Her one reference to Knowlton comes in the second sentence of her climactic Chapter 12, “At 4:30 p.m., on July 20, 1993, according to an eyewitness, Foster’s car was not at the parking lot at Fort Marcy Park.”

The accompanying endnote, no. 294, has this reference, “Kenneth W. Starr, Independent Counsel, Report of the Death of Vincent W. Foster, October 10, 1997, Appendix to Report; September 23, 1997 letter from Patrick Knowlton’s attorney, John H. Clarke.”

So there it is again, but the reader, unless he ferrets it out for himself, would never guess how significant that appendix, and its inclusion in the report over Starr’s objection, really is. Thanks to that earlier endnote, though, not a great deal of ferreting is required. It’s right there in the links, and the accompanying article explains its significance.

Having revealed what newspaper, magazine, and book writers across the political spectrum have worked hard to conceal, Marinka Peschmann, then, has managed to write a book that is not altogether worthless. One can only wonder if she knows it.

David Martin

January 2, 2015

Addendum

The author has expressed her considerable displeasure with my review of her book, and as I read it over, I must admit that it does have one big shortcoming. I talk about the author’s lengthy conversations with Linda Tripp and the author’s speculation that Vince Foster actually blew his brains out with that .38 caliber revolver in his own office in the White House, but I don’t say what one thing has to do with the other. The fact is that it was not all that clear to me upon first reading, so I had to go back and read it over more carefully. Apparently, it all has to do with Foster’s briefcase and Tripp’s eventual hedging on the story that she told the police investigators about it. She had said that she was certain that Foster carried nothing with him when Foster left his office after lunch at his desk, in contradiction to the recollection of aide Tom Castleton, who recalled that Foster had his briefcase with him when he left the office. Kenneth Starr had gone with Tripp’s memory, which worked well for him because it explained why the briefcase was found in his office.

Here, on pp. 98-99 is Marinka’s epiphany in her own fevered prose:

In an interview with the Park Police, two days after Foster’s death, the investigators wrote: “Ms. Tripp makes it a habit to notice what the staff members are taking with them when they leave the office in order to determine…how long she may expect them to be away from the office. Ms. Tripp was absolutely certain that Mr. Foster did not carry anything in the way of a briefcase, bag, umbrella, etc. out of the office.”

Three years later, Linda confirmed to OIC investigators that her detailed statement “accurately reflected her recollection.” The investigators are trying to take down the president…Don’t speculate…Don’t offer information… (Peschman’s italics)

“But then…” I squeaked.

“I told you, we were told what to say—“ Linda fired back, cutting me off, catching herself, followed by a non-apologetic backtrack. “Look, Tom thought Vince had his briefcase with him, so I, I must be mistaken.” Mistaken?! (her italics again)

In an instant, the heavy burden of towing [sic] the Clinton White House line appeared to have soared off of her, when a blink later, it spiked back down to earth, attached with her cover story.

And then, according to Peschmann, Tripp proceeds to half take back what she has said, but Peschmann is off and running: Foster did for certain have his briefcase with him when he left the office and the only way it could have gotten back in the office is that Foster came back to the White House later, undetected by anyone after having gorged himself with some more food (presumably in bleak solitude somewhere) and proceeded to end it all violently right there in his office. The powerful blast of a .38 revolver would have been heard all over the White House (and likely beyond), of course, producing an instant sensation, but as Peschmann tells it, only a couple of Clinton loyalist lawyers react to it, while being remotely controlled by telephone by one “X,” who, by the description can only be Hillary Rodham Clinton. Panic mode sets in over the potential embarrassment, so they trundle the body off to an unlikely far corner of a Civil War relic of a park across the Potomac to be discovered by an even more unlikely passer-by (but that’s another story).

Yes, I know, it does sound pretty preposterous, but to the legions of people who hate Hillary and don’t think all that critically, it has some ring of truth, especially as Peschmann tells it. I can’t help thinking that the theory would have sounded particularly preposterous to Tripp, herself, who worked at the White House and knows full well that nothing so outlandish as Peschmann describes actually happened. You can hardly imagine what a sensation the loud report of a powerful weapon like a .38 revolver going off in the White House would have created. That’s why, insofar as I can tell, Peschmann never runs her theory by Tripp to see what she thinks of it. As much as she invokes her name, one could get the impression that this Foster-suicide-in-the-White House story is Linda Tripp’s. It is most definitely not.

 

David Martin

May 22, 2016

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

Please keep comments relevant to the topic. Multiple links will automatically relegate your comment to the spam section, so keep that in mind as you post.

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com

Parade Magazine’s Latest Bunkum, on 9/11

Parade Magazine’s Latest Bunkum, on 9/11

Parade of Lies, Part 8

by DC Dave

The most recent article in this series, “Parade Magazine in Full Propaganda Mode,” was about that pervasive propaganda organ’s writing on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Now, just a few days before the thirteenth anniversary of the 9/11 incident, we have come full circle. Here is the exchange on November 4, 2001, trumping up an excuse for the invasion of Iraq in Walter Scott’s Personality Parade that caused me to first pay attention to this insidious little publication:

Q. Before our war on terrorists began, how well did Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein, the world’s top terrorists, get along? -C. Barnes, San Antonio, Texas

A. Not well at all, but they worked together on the principle that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Intelligence sources tell us Saddam encouraged attacks on U.S. targets because he harbors a deep resentment against George H. W. Bush, who created the coalition that defeated Iraq in the Gulf War. Our sources say Saddam figured the most effective way to punish the former President was to hurt his son, who now occupies the White House. It was a massive miscalculation. The recent outpouring of patriotic fervor pushed George W. Bush’s popularity rating to more than 90%.

STpennye15_28_1_1554343540

Maj. Heather Penney, and her father Col. John Penney, both pilots. Maj. Penny flew an F-16 on Sept. 11, 2001, that was destined to intercept and possibly bring down Flight 93. Penny Family Photo

Now they’re at it again. Four days before the thirteenth anniversary of 9/11, they’re trying to keep the flame of martial fervor burning by recycling The Washington Post’s 10th anniversary “scoop” about the would-be heroic female National Guard fighter pilot at Maryland’s Andrews Air Force Base, Heather “Lucky” Penney, who took to the air on September 11, 2001, fully prepared to make a 140907-American-Stories-Heather-Penney-vtrmartyr of herself for her country. In the print edition of the slender little rag, accompanied by the same photo of the flags at Shanksville, Pennsylvania, that they have on their web site, the subtitle of the story is, “On 9/11, F-16 pilot Heather Penney was prepared to complete an unthinkable mission: take down United Flight 93.” The title is a quote from Penney, herself, that echoes the official story line that the passengers actually took over the flight, resulting in its crashing into the ground about midway between Pittsburgh and Harrisburg, “Because of What They Did, We Didn’t Have to.”

Bill Hewitt, interviewing for Parade, gets this response from Penney concerning the events of September 11, 2001

After the Pentagon was hit, the Secret Service called and ordered us to get airborne. We had an idea there was another aircraft coming toward Washington. [Editor’s note: The fourth hijacked plane, Flight 93, was believed to be headed to the White House or the Capitol.] Because we’d just returned from a training mission in Nevada, there weren’t any missiles or bombs or high-explosive bullets on the airplanes, and it was going to be a while before the weapons people could get the missiles built up. My commander, Col. Marc “Sass” Sasseville, looked at me and said, “Lucky, you’re with me.”

Uh, right. I know we are supposed to believe that the complicated, well-nigh impossible scheme of 19 poorly trained jihadists miraculously succeeded because our designated defenders were a bunch of stumblebums (and Osama bin Laden somehow knew that they would be), but was it really this bad? What is the Secret Service, which was under the U.S. Department of the Treasury at the time, doing giving orders to some unprepared Air National Guard jet jockeys at the local air base, and how did the Secret Service know what Penney’s superiors in the Air Force didn’t know?

A Cacophony of Voices

Perhaps she added this embellishment to the original Post story because Hugh Turley had written a follow-up article in which he reminded the Post reporter, Steve Hendrix, that according to the official 9/11 Report, the Air Force didn’t know about Flight 93 until after it had crashed. This is from his earlier September 2009 Hyattsville Life and Times article, “The Case of Lt. Kuczynski”:

The 9/11 Commission Report…says flatly that the military was not aware of United 93 until it crashed.  The official timeline has FAA headquarters knowing that United 93 was hijacked by 9:34, but not telling NEADS [North East Air Defense Sector] of the hijacking until 10:07, after the plane had crashed at 10:03 in Pennsylvania.

The Report clearly states, “…[n]o one from FAA headquarters requested military assistance regarding United 93.  Nor did any manager at FAA headquarters pass any of the information it had about United 93 to the military.”

The first NEADS knew about it, according to the report, was at 10:07 a.m., when a call came in from the military liaison at Cleveland Center.  “The NEADS air defenders never located the flight or followed it on their radar scopes,” it goes on.  “The flight had already crashed by the time the military learned it was hijacked.”

Both Penney and the 9/11 Commission Report, furthermore, are out of step with a very early CBS News report on September 16, 2001:

As the fourth hijacked plane was over Pennsylvania, seemingly headed for Washington, military commanders, the FAA, and White House officials were on a conference call discussing options.

At the time, there were two F-16s armed with air-to-air missiles within 60 miles of Flight 93. But the fighters were still out of missile range when the jetliner crashed, sources said.

No decision had to be made, but administration officials say that, had the jetliner continued toward Washington, the fighter jets would have shot it down. The rationale, say the sources, was that the government was willing to “kill 100 to save a thousand”.

Assuming that that early report is accurate, those two fully armed fighter jets would have easily been within range of Flight 93 long before Penney and company would have had to have performed their suicidal ramming stunt. The accuracy of that report is further buttressed by Turley’s 2009 article:

On the first anniversary of the crash, Brigadier General Montague Winfield told ABC News that the Pentagon’s National Military Command Center “received the report from the FAA that Flight 93 had turned off its transponder, had turned, and was now heading towards Washington,” adding, “The decision was made to try to go intercept Flight 93.”

The documentation for that assertion can be found here. Turley reports further, drawing from the Air Force’s official history of the day, “Air War Over America,” published by Tyndall Air Force Base:

NEADS…Commander Robert Marr reported that around 9:36, when it changed direction, while it is still flying west, United 93 was being monitored.  NORAD Commander Major General Larry Arnold agreed, saying, “We watched the 93 track as it meandered around the Ohio-Pennsylvania area.”

Furthermore, Arnold, testified to the 9/11 Commission that he placed fighters over DC, “to put them in position in case United 93 were to head that way.”

Even if you take the would-be heroine Penney at her word that she and her commander were all primed and ready to pay the ultimate price for their country, there was apparently not the slightest need for their heroism. The fighters that General Arnold speaks of were the ones that arrived after the Pentagon explosions: “We launched the aircraft out of Langley to put them over top of Washington, D.C., not in response to American Airlines 77, but really to put them in position in case United 93 were to head that way.”

So take your choice. There was either a superfluity of fully armed fighter jets bearing down on the doomed flight from the north and already over Washington, having come from the south, as the military authorities tell us; the Air Force was in the dark about Flight 93 until after it had crashed, according to the 9/11 Commission; or the only thing that stood between the commandeered plane and our politicians in the White House or the Capitol Building were our own pair of suicide pilots in the DC Air National Guard, in the version spun by The Washington Post and Parade magazine. They really do seem to be a bunch of stumblebums when it comes to getting their stories straight.

The Case of Lt. Kuczynski

kuczynski_a2Trumping them all, to my mind, is Air Force Lieutenant Anthony Kuczynski with the story that he told to the alumni magazine of his alma mater, St. Thomas University in St. Paul, Minnesota. “I was given direct orders to shoot down the airliner,” he said. To me, that has the ring of truth because he was speaking out of turn. He didn’t realize that he was speaking out of turn, because, after all, like the government and the press, he was repeating the official story that, in the end, his orders didn’t matter because the passengers took control of the airplane and caused it to crash into the ground. But apparently he got too close to the truth, because, with the exception of one columnist at the free monthly Hyattsville (MD) Life and Times, the press has ignored his revelations.  He is now a Lieutenant Colonel at Luke Air Force Base in Arizona.

To the dispassionate observer, it looks for all the world like orders to shoot down the plane were carried out. I will admit that I am theorizing here, but the theory that seems to fit the known facts best is that, indeed, control of Flight 93 had been regained, but it had been regained by the pilots from its remote-control takeover. That’s why it had to be shot down. It is a great deal more believable than that a fully intact airliner made the hole in the ground near Shanksville, PA, and produced debris scattered miles apart and that passengers made cell phone calls while out of the range of cell phone towers.

debrisfields

And which of those two Air Force pilots appears most believable, the one who uses the likes of Parade magazine and The Washington Post as her megaphone and now has an important position with the nation’s largest military contractor, or an active duty Air Force flier with no apparent axe to grind? Which of the two has the greater incentive to continue to stoke the martial fires and to keep us at war?

David Martin

September 10, 2014

Follow @BuelahMan

BuelaHuh?

Did I rub you the wrong way or stroke you just right? Let me know below in the comments section or Email me at buelahman {AT} g m a i l {DOT} com

If for some reason you actually liked this post, click the “Like” button below. If you feel like someone else needs to see this (or you just want to ruin someone’s day), click the Share Button at the bottom of the post and heap this upon some undeserving soul. And as sad as this thought may be, it may be remotely possible that us rednecks here at The Revolt please you enough (or more than likely, you are just a glutton for punishment??), that you feel an overwhelming desire to subscribe via the Email subscription and/or RSS Feed buttons found on the upper right hand corner of this page (may the Lord have mercy on your soul).

All posts are opinions meant to foster comment, reporting, teaching & study under the “fair use doctrine” in Sec. 107 of U.S. Code Title 17. No statement of fact is made or should be implied. Ads appearing on this blog are solely the product of the advertiser and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of BuehlahMan’s Revolt or WordPress.com