- Why haven't we seen the routine video surveillance tapes
of ANY of the passengers alleged to have boarded the ill-fated 9/11 flights
at Boston's Logan, Newark's Liberty and Washington's Dulles international
- Will two lips in Holland end the 9/11 coverup?
- NEW YORK -- Those who have
bothered to read the 9/11 skeptics know about the extraordinary "coincidences"
that took place that fateful morning. One of them happens to be the lack
of routine video surveillance tapes of ANY of the passengers alleged to
have boarded the ill-fated flights at Boston's Logan, Newark's Liberty
and Washington's Dulles international airports.
- The 9/11 Commission simply ignored this issue even though
it can be fairly said that not only did the 9/11 attacks on New York and
Washington originate at these airport gates, but so did the resulting invasions
and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq.
- Why haven't we seen these video tapes? Why has the Fourth
Estate failed to ask, Why haven't we seen these video tapes? Why the conspiracy
- Well, the answer may very well lie in Holland. You see,
security at some if not all of these airport gates of 9/11 was in the hands
of an American minimum-wage subsidiary of a Dutch corporation called ICTS-International.
What is most remarkable about this arrangement is that the Dutch corporation
ICTS-International was, as of 9/11, Dutch in name only. An early 2003 check
of its web-site showed a Board of Directors consisting entirely of nationals
of the Zionist state with the single exception of the Comptroller, who
apparently was the nominal Dutchman. And if I need to clue in the clueless,
the Zionists were hellbent on finding a reason for the USA to invade Iraq.
And it would be fair to say that these Zionists of ICTS-International were
the gatekeepers of 9/11 and all that followed, such as the invasions of
Iraq and Afghanistan. Interesting, eh?
- But the story gets even wilder. Not long after 9/11,
the chairman of ICTS, Ezra Harel, whose surname is famous in the annals
of the Mossad, died suddenly of a heart attack in his early 50s on his
yacht off the coast of Palestine. Talk about not being available for comment!
- But that's not the kicker. Hours before the House version
of the first Patriot Act went to a vote, "technical corrections"
were inserted into the body of the legislation whereby foreign security
companies such as ICTS-International would be immune from lawsuits related
to the events of 9/11. Talk about not being available for deposition! This
"Patriot" act legislative sleight of hand occurred before the
inception of the 9/11 Commission when Fearless Leader George W. Bush was
still resisting the very IDEA of an investigation into 9/11. Hence, in
the face of an institutional cover-up, citizens were denied the possibility
of a discovery process which is normally afforded to litigants. Without
such discovery process, ICTS-International would never be compelled by
a court of law to give testimony and show evidence related to the missing
airport video surveillance tapes of 9/11 or any other aspect of security
measures in place on 9/11.
- The legal situation has since changed and ICTS-International
is now a co-defendant in a lawsuit in Federal District Court for the Southern
District of New York. (see www.sept11tortlitigation.com) More about this
- And so, we are supposed to believe that even as multiple
NORAD drills were underway, video surveillance tapes from multiple cameras
at multiple locations in three different "Category X" high security
international airports just happened to fail to capture images of ANY of
the passengers - the good, the bad and the ugly - about to board the ill-fated
flights of 9/11! As many 9/11 skeptics already know, what I have just
described here is just one aspect of the BIG LIE about 9/11. Some of the
answers to our national security problem will be found in Holland. That
is for sure!
- But there are those who will insist that they have seen
on television video surveillance tapes of the hijackers of 9/11 and are
satisfied with the official explanation of what happened on that fateful
- However, these people are confused by the tape repeatedly
shown on TV of two of the alleged hijackers (Mohammad Atta being one of
them) passing through a security checkpoint at Portland Maine International
Airport to take a connecting flight to Boston on the morning of 11 September
- This Portland tape has no timestamp, which makes it suspect.
Also, even IF the tape were genuine, it does not place either of the two
young Arabs at Logan International Airport.
- Nearly all Americans were lulled into believing that
the Portland, Maine tape was sufficient proof when it was not. People were
mesmerized by the repeated showing of this tape on TV and in their emotional
state did not realize exactly what they were looking at and what they weren't
- Also, yet another tape was shown in the 24 hour interval
leading to the official release of the 9/11 Commission Report; however,
this tape, released to the news media by the South Carolina law firm Motley
Rice LLC, was almost immediately withdrawn because it quickly became apparent
that it was bogus. This Motley Rice surveillance tape purportedly showed
two young Arabs boarding flight 77 at Dulles International Airport on the
morning of 9/11. But again, just like the Portland Maine tape, there is
no timestamp, which makes it suspect. Beyond that, as pointed out by the
late, great Internet researcher/writer Joe Vialls, who some believe is
really Ari Ben-Menashe (see www.judicial-inc.biz), the shadows appearing
just outside the terminal door are those you would expect to see at midday
rather than in the early morning. Moreover, the surveillance camera is
no ordinary surveillance camera; for the tape reveals a panning camera
focused on the two young Arabs and then zooming in on them and then moving
left as they move left instead of following the pretty blonde lady who
was going to the right. Clearly, some person unknown at some time unknown
was filming these young Arab men for a specific but unknown reason.
- This Motley Rice film was never shown again because of
the critical eyes of researchers, many of whom preserved copies of the
mysterious tape in their computers.
- In consideration of the foregoing, one must conclude
that no tape has EVER been shown that reveals ANY of the passengers boarding
the 9/11 flights out of Boston's Logan, Newark's Liberty and Washington's
Dulles international airports.
- One must also ask, if the 9/11 surveillance tapes at
these airports do in fact exist, why haven't we seen them? And if they
do not even exist, how can this be explained?