Thursday, October 20, 2005
Most of the official 2996 September 11 victims never died in the September 11 terror attacks – at least not in the official, lying version of 911.And how do we know this?
Most of those 2996 were fabricated, as official- 911 victims, by bush and his thugs in order to generate a bigger-than-Pearl Harbor warmongering spin.
Did you, associated press bush parrots, see the 2996 alleged bodies or body parts for yourselves?Right. But it's okay:
Bet you didn’t.
And even if you had, you would have been in no position to identify all those bodies or parts thereof.
So you’re just parroting/trumpeting something you didn’t independently verify.
That’s unobjective reporting to be euphemistic…
You’re just toeing the bush party line – been doing so for 4 years.
Or did you call up/visit each and every of those alleged 2996 families and crosscheck with relatives whether those 911 deaths are for real?
Bet you didn’t – though you sure would have possessed the means and reason to do so.
And if you had done so, I’m sure you would have mentioned it in your report – but you don’t.
You ought to have verified and double-damn verified that governmental 911 victims list, name by name, run it all down,1 through 2996– but you didn’t. You flushed your journalistic ethics down the toilet.
That’s why you are bush whores.
You’re sellin’ for certain what isn’t.
Frauds. Impostors. Deceivers. Spouters of lies.
The false certainty you have been trumpeting – that 2996 fell victim to the 911 attacks – equals a lie because you are falsely confirming what amounts to nothing else but a baseless government allegation.
I do not blame you too much for being propaganda parrots – what few journalists try to be independent these days, get shot dead at checkpoints in iraq or sth.Nice. It gets even better when he decided to investigate 9/11 matters for himself, by picking up the phone to call victims' families:
So maybe I shouldn’t call you whores – maybe you’re just one bunch of lousy creeps.
Anyway you suck. So wholeheartedly – fuck off and die.
This is Blake Allison’s number:Can't imagine why he'd hang up...
781 XXX 2 [I have deleted it -ed] - it’s a matter of public record.
I called, and…he hung up on me.
How nice of him. It certainly didn’t dispel my doubts – quite the contrary.
Next I found, always on legacy.com, a purported “Sarah Preston” signing a tribute to Anna Allison.And how does he justify this astonishing claim? By linking to other 'authoritative sources' such as...Wait for it... Sydney Indymedia and a thread which has been active for over two years and still believes its own BS.
Again I found her out on whitepages.com, this is the nr:
And this time around I got the first ever confirmation that an alleged 911 victim was a real person.
At least according to Mrs Preston, who kindly spoke to me on the phone and said she was Anna’s “first cousin”.
But at first ,when I asked her to confirm to me that she had written that legacy.com tribute in 2002, she was vague and said only “maybe, or maybe it was my husband”.
I found that odd, I mean the gravest terror attack in then history of the US happens and your first cousin dies in it and you don’t even remember whether you posted her a tribute or not or maybe it was your husband and why would he post in your name, is he your ghostwriter?
Anyway she said “it was a time period when we used to write all those tributes…”.
All those tributes. Well I didn’t find any other Anna Allison tributes by Sarah Preston and I researched the subject pretty darn extensively.
But let’s assume for a moment that Sarah Preston really is who she claims to be – Allison’s first cousin. And let’s assume she really hasn’t seen or heard from her cousin since September 11, 2001.
This still does NOT prove Anna died – and if she did die, it does NOT prove HOW or WHERE she died – because, again ,more likely than not American Airlines 11 not only never struck WTC1 – it probably never even took off on that day because it wasn’t even scheduled to fly and it wasn’t on record as having flown on 911
Crazy wacked out stories on Indymedia sites using other Indymedia sites as references, despite the fact none of them are accountable, professional or even reasonable. Can you say "circle-jerk"?
How about just "jerk" then.
My question is: are they all nutters?
Answer is no. They do do a lot of good. Because of their editorial freedom a lot of nutcases do post absolute filth; but anyone who enters indymedia posts to read know this and are thus quite prepared to read every article critically.
My two scents (sic)
P.S.: and don't start about the sic. I write it down coz I like to, ok smartypants?