Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Private Attorney General's REPLY re: "Who ’s Afraid of Gordon Duff?" by Kevin Barrett (11/14/2012)

Expand Messages
  • Supreme Law Firm
    ... From: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S. Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 8:47 PM Subject: Re: Private Attorney General s REPLY re: Who’s Afraid of
    Message 1 of 1 , Nov 14 8:49 PM


      ----- Forwarded Message -----
      From: Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
      Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 8:47 PM
      Subject: Re: Private Attorney General's REPLY re: "Who’s Afraid of Gordon Duff?" by Kevin Barrett (11/14/2012)

      style="text-indent:0px;letter-spacing:normal;font-variant:normal;font-style:normal;font-weight:normal;line-height:normal;border-collapse:separate;text-transform:none;font-size:medium;white-space:normal;font-family:Helvetica;word-spacing:0px;">VT isn't suppressing Pentagon evidence

      Yes they are. 


      So, let's agree to disagree.

      But, thanks for replying. 

      I thought your ears were deaf to our investigation.


      p.s.  What the heck is "Medbillz, Inc."?  A Panama corporation?



      --
      Sincerely yours,
      /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
      Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
      http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
      http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
      http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
      http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
      http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
      http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

      All Rights Reserved without Prejudice
      On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Kevin Barrett <kbarrett@...> wrote:
      The problem with your theory about VT is that VT isn't suppressing Pentagon evidence.

      It's the "mainstream truthers" like AE911Truth, 911blogger, etc. who are suppressing BOTH the Pentagon evidence AND evidence of Israeli complicity - while VT is suppressing neither.

      I do think VT leans a little extra hard on the Israelis for various reasons. Most of them good.

      -Kevin


      On Nov 14, 2012, at 10:11 PM, Paul Andrew Mitchell wrote:

      Re:  http://truthjihad.com/news/?p=154


      Greetings Kevin Barrett,

      I don't know if you are just ignoring the work we did for U.S. Coast Guard Investigations,
      and/or some software "filter" is censoring my email to you, so that you never see it.

      But, I will try again anyway.


      I'm not buying into the 60/40 distribution on which you speculate in your article above.

      Here are just a few reasons why:


      If Standard Operating Procedures ("SOP") would have assembled
      U.S. Navy Commanders at the Naval Command Center ASAP after
      the WTC towers were attacked, a direct hit by an air-to-ground missile ("AGM")
      would definitely have taken out many top-level U.S. Navy officers.

      Read MURDER! 

      Read HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION!


      Please ask yourself this one question:  how probable was it that
      the Office of Naval Intelligence ("ONI") was ON TO the conspiracy,
      and those Naval Officers had to be taken out for the Neocons to
      get their war against Iraq?

      Remember that line from the movie JFK by Oliver Stone?
      "Just get me elected;  I'll give you your damn war!"
      Lyndon Johnson snapped.

      I mean, Sibel Edmonds was ON TO it, and ONI have historically
      run circles around both the FBI and the CIA.

      The Feds received numerous advance warnings, did they not?


      Now ask yourself another key question:  how important was it
      to destroy the evidence that $2.3 TRILLION USD had been embezzled
      from the Pentagon's accounts by the likes of Dov S. Zakheim and
      his accomplices, and also to destroy the Pentagon accountants
      who were doing the forensic reconstruction of that crime?

      It must be difficult for the average American to appreciate
      fully that inter-service competition and rivalry have existed
      inside the Pentagon for decades. 

      Just ask the Joint Chiefs of Staff!  They'll tell you.

      It must also be difficult for the average American to appreciate
      that the Pentagon's automatic fire control system could not
      have been so easily penetrated -- and fooled into standing down --
      unless both the incoming AGM and the incoming A-3 Skywarrior
      were both retrofitted with a "friendly" transponder identification
      beacon.

      Clearly, that necessarily implies an "Inside Job" because
      those transponder codes are highly classified details.

      There really is no other reasonable explanation for why
      Captain Gerald DeConto would have been on the telephone,
      requesting verbal authorization from Secretary of the Navy
      Gordon England, to "engage the incoming" -- at the very
      moment the AGM's depleted uranium warhead exploded
      and incinerated Captain DeConto instantly.

      He's now interred at Arlington National Cemetery.

      If Cheney and his cohorts were watching the "incoming"
      in the bowels of the PEOC, you can be absolutely sure
      that ONI personnel were also watching that "incoming" on their
      own radar monitors, with their own mil-spec aircraft tracking systems.

      The airspace immediately around the Pentagon is easily
      the most tightly controlled airspace anywhere in the world.


      Now, when I asked Gordo about all the photographed
      aircraft debris which our investigation has carefully assembled,
      all he could say was that "it was trucked in" (his exact words).

      Then, he totally stopped corresponding with me any further on this point:
      no further "details" of his allegation were ever forthcoming.

      Well, after assisting U.S. Coast Guard Investigations
      for 7 full YEARS, it is my studied professional conclusion
      that certain very limited amounts of debris may have
      been "trucked in", but it was not debris from an incoming and
      remotely controlled A-3 Skywarrior -- packed with TNT and jet fuel --
      after that former U.S. Navy jet was launched from the
      flight deck of the USS George Washington.

      The latter U.S. aircraft carrier was anchored off
      the coast of Long Island that morning: 
      so, the A-3 was not "trucked in" --
      it was FLOWN IN using remote control.

      Ask the Russians:  we have located reports that
      their surveillance satellite photographed that launch
      on the morning of 9/11/2001.


      I urge you to contemplate the following active
      investigative hypothesis:

      Veterans Today is attempting to shift the attention
      of their readers to blame the Mossad and Israeli partisans
      for their obvious complicity in the events of 9/11. 

      However, in doing so, it is clear to me that
      their chosen writers are doing everything possible
      to avoid and ignore the complicity of U.S. Military personnel
      in planning and executing the attack on the Pentagon.

      The hit on the Pentagon is, therefore, the key to the whole event.

      Accordingly, I am quite prepared to argue -- with evidence -- that
      this hit and its aftermath were intentionally planned and executed
      as a "self-inflicted wound".

      If Pentagon criminal investigators had been serious about
      achieving positive identification of the murder weapons
      that killed over 100+ Pentagon employees, they would NEVER
      have allowed raw cctv surveillance video data to be altered
      in such gross and obvious ways.

      Fortunately for our investigation, a foreign "purplish" color
      was applied in such a way that it outlined the A-3's fuselage
      -- forward of the visible tail section -- almost perfectly.

      That purplish color even "bumped up" to obscure
      the overhead cockpit canopy.


      Consider also Wayne Madsen's report that a full El Al 747
      departed JFK at 16:11 on 9/11/2001, destination
      David Ben Gurion International Airport in Tel Aviv.

      Madsen also alleges in his report that the departure
      of that El Al flight not only violated the proper grounding order
      issued earlier by Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta;
      that departure was also assisted by U.S. Military personnel
      on the ground.

      Well, if the hit squad needed a getaway vehicle,
      how convenient to load all of them at once onto a huge 747
      and rush them swiftly to safety -- in Tel Aviv, of all places!

      I can hear the heroes' welcomes echoing in unison
      and resounding to the very bottom of hell and back up again.


      There are further relevant reports that the A-3 in question
      had been extensively modified by separate teams
      who converged at different times on an aircraft hangar located
      on the premises of Fort-Collins Loveland Municipal Airport,
      with immediate access to the tarmac and runways.

      That A-3 was part of a fleet of same purchased from
      the Navy by Raytheon Corporation.

      Can you say "Flight Termination System" with a straight face?


      How about the Boeing E-4B "airborne command center"?

      How probable is it that this E-4B was actually recording "snuff films"
      to be sold promptly after 9/11 to the highest bidders?  Just look
      closely at the command and control equipment that is installed
      on that jet!


      Of course these people are THAT EVIL:  the ensuing war on Iraq
      killed 1.25 Million Iraqis, the last time I looked at the casualty count.



      In conclusion, THE question for this hour now becomes this:
      when it is this easy to prove Pentagon complicity in 9/11,
      the motive for Veterans Today to avoid that "hot potato"
      and refuse to report the mounting evidence of that complicity,
      truly calls into question their journalistic integrity --
      if there still is such a thing anywhere on this planet.



      --
      Sincerely yours,
      /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
      Private Attorney General, 18 U.S.C. 1964
      http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
      http://www.supremelaw.org/reading.list.htm
      http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm (Home Page)
      http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm (Support Policy)
      http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm (Client Guidelines)
      http://www.supremelaw.org/support.guidelines.htm (Policy + Guidelines)

      All Rights Reserved without Prejudice




      --



    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.