THE CHERTOFF TANGENT

POPMECH SPEWING DHS PROPAGANDA?
Adam Larson
Caustic Logic / The Frustrating Fraud
December 2006, updated 2/5/07

911 In Plane Site's approach of focusing on the mechanics of the government attack – and doing so piss-poorly – could not long go unnoticed. First-released in mid-2004 to wide acceptance, the first ill effect the video suffered was the early unraveling of its popularity through well-timed interventions like those of Oil Empire and 9-11 Research, which surfaced before the end of 2004. The next was its widely read flogging in the pages of the March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics. Thus many Americans first heard of the video that “will change September 11” in between articles about Jay Leno’s giant trucks and a “lawn tractor face-off.” The article looked at a narrow slice of easily-debunked 9/11 theories in its areas of expertise and sponsorship, and spent much of its ink slaying the then-popular IPS. But wait! The article was principally by Benjamin Chertoff, Popular Mechanics’ 25-year old research editor. He was immediately suspected by many 9/11 Truthers of being a cousin (or a nephew in one report) to the just-appointed Director of the Department of Homeland Security, one Michael Chertoff. DHS was a new agency with little-understood powers, and some now suspected they included propaganda, with deals to be made over heaping plates of potato salad at family reunions, and with revalations targeted to the PopMech crowd - a segment of the population best known not for their seething political power but for their manual skills and prominent ass cracks.

Most people who care simply state the cousin link as an evident fact with no source needed; when they do cite anything, the only source seems to be Christopher Bollyn at American Free Press (AFP), a paper suspiciously suspicious of Israel, alternately accused of anti-Semitism by the Anti-Defamation League, and accused by others of ADL infiltration. A dedicated 9/11 Truth warrior, Bollyn had already discovered “cousin” Michael held dual American-Israeli citizenship. He says he called Ben Chertoff directly, and questioned the editor until he became “uncomfortable.” Unable to get a confirmation there, he called Ben’s mother in New York and got her to admit “yes, of course, he is a cousin.” In his March 6 article Bollyn included the first name and home city of this alleged mother of a possible Israeli-Illuminati agent. He also dropped the line “this is exactly the kind of “journalism” one would expect to find in a dictatorship like that of Saddam Hussein's Iraq,” referring I presume to the PopMech piece, not his own work. For what it’s worth, Bollyn was fired from AFP in late 2006 for “disloyalty” and submitting false stories, including pushing Sam Danner's fictitious account of the Pentagon attack despite numerous red flags. [2]

In a March interview with Art Bell, while the “wing nuts” were still following this lead, Ben could neither confirm nor deny a relation to the just-appointed Director. His only line of defense was that he was unaware of the possibility until after the article had gone to press. He later postulated a relation “back in 19th century Belarus,” but by the September 11, 2006 US News, he was stating categorically “no one in my family has ever met anyone related to Michael Chertoff.” He would not likely say this so firmly if it could be proved wrong, and so far no Internet sleuth has shaken the family tree and posted any juicy fruit.

In fact Ben’s little article that caused such a big uproar was later expanded into a book: “Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can’t Stand Up to the Facts” (Hearst, August 2006, with a forward by Senator John McCain). Ironically enough, the book was able to take advantage of this whole tangent to illustrate their point: in the afterword, PM’s Editor-in-Chief, James Meigs noted “as often happens in the world of conspiracy theories, a grain of truth - it's possible that Ben and Michael Chertoff are distantly related - was built into a towering dune. In fact, Ben and Michael Chertoff have never spoken.” And more to the larger point everyone else has glossed over, “no one at Popular Mechanics” by any name “had any contact with Michael Chertoff's office while preparing the article.” [3]

Nonetheless, there may still be more than coincidence to this episode, with the same uncommon name appearing twice in as many months, both flanking the official 9/11 story - especially when we consider the proximity to the release of the curiously bad IPS. Just as von Kleist’s video has sunk into the collective mind of that certain skeptical segment of the population, in January 2005 Michael was appointed to head DHS, a post created by 9/11. At the end of February a hit piece slaying “lies” about the terrorist attacks, primarily those advocated by IPS, went public with another Chertoff listed as in charge. This certainly seems odd to the people who are into the Truth scene. It seems odd to me. I was there, and saw the movement surge with anger and strengthened resolve. It may have sounded silly and blatant to task such things to one’s cousin, but after all, we remembered Jeb Bush handing his brother the election in 2000...

In retrospect, I would go so far as to speculate that Bush’s people in fact helped somehow in getting In Plane Site out there, probably through some intermediary – since I’m speculating, let’s say Karl Rove - to set up the straw man in advance. While they were grooming Michael Chertoff for DHS, the video was at work shifting the debate to the mechanics level while shedding all circumstantial evidence of motive that allows the plot to make sense. On top of this, it analyzed the mechanical evidence with unprecedented ineptitude so Popular Mechanics could easily take it on. The operatives behind the scenes of course knew a “Chertoff” was working there and would be in charge of any such article, giving the wing nuts yet another red herring to stumble over for a while.

Sources:
[1] Bollyn, Christopher. “Chertoff's Cousin Penned Popular Mechanics 9/11 Hit Piece.” American Free Press. March 7 2005. via Prison Planet.
[2] World Independent News Group/WING TV. “American free Press Fires Christopher Bollyn.”
[3] Meigs, James B. “The Conspiracy Industry.” Afterword to Debunking 9/11 Myths. June 2006. Published online October 13, 2006.

THE BERNARD BROWNS SEAM

ONE UNWISE MOVE AVOIDED BY THE LOOSE CHANGE CREW

Loose Change director Dylan Avery’s sometimes flippant attitude is one lightning rod for controversy, and emblematic of a deeper problem (or perceived problem) in the Truth movement’s approach. There is an over-simplified perception that the "tinfoil hat" revisionists are young, naive, brash and disrespectful. They have their facts wrong and are causing real pain by bringing these arguments up, facts they fail to recognize due to their youth, naiveté, and the brainwashing administered by the leaders of the 9/11 moonbat cult.

The most relevant such controversy for our study of the Pentagon evidence is the odd case of the Bernard Browns, which I only just now learned of. Brown the younger, age 11, of Washington DC,, was headed on a field trip to California, hosted by the National Geographic Society and the kids wound up on AA Flight 77. His dad, Bernard sr. happens to work not just at the Pentagon, but in the Navy wing that was then hit by the very plane carrying his son - specifically, some reports claim, in the Naval Command Center, the very target the plane seems to have been aiming for as it plowed through the building.

This is odd enough to start with – and tragic of course – but odder yet, Brown sr. reportedly told his son on Monday night "don't be afraid to die because we all are going to die someday." [1] This discussion was taken by many as evidence of the father's foreknowledge, but is at least as likely just spurred by his son's general fear of flight. But then oddest of all, Brown sr. may well have died himself when the plane hit but for the fact that he took that day off to play golf, reportedly an anomaly for this hardworking and attentive man.

In November 2004, just as the original cut of Loose Change was being finished, Avery was asked about this bizarre confluence of events in an interview with WING TV. He explained the case, clearly hinting that Brown sr. had foreknowledge of the attack and sent his son into it. He thought about contacting Brown;

“Me and Phil [Jayhan I presume] were actually considering tracking him down and getting him on the phone just to get him to talk about 9/11 and see if anything slips, but I think he was either deeply involved with it and talking to him on the phone about it might not be such a hot idea, or I think talking to him about sending his son to die might be a bad idea.” [2]

Mary Katharine Ham, managing editor of Townhall.com doubted Avery’s accusation that Brown “put his 11-year-old son on Flight 77 that morning knowing that it was destined to take him to his death while he took the day off to go golfing as the carnage unfolded.” [3] From the point of view of an inside job of such a scale, this is really not too far-fetched, but Ham’s and others’ emotional gut reaction to this accusation is telling. “Capitalistic Pig” posted on the Ace of Spades forum “Bernard Brown Sr. and others should drag these sons of bitches into court by the scruff of their fucking necks.” [4] Their video was bad enough, but now their patience is wearing thin and I can hear old ropes being broken out for the lynching party. Pursuing the Bernard Browns seam, just to add yet one more to the list of hundreds still unresolved, was not a wise as far as winning converts. Maybe that’s why they apparently abandoned it before they even made their movie (one of the few wise moves they made) and this had to be dug up in an old interview instead of seen on-screen.

Still, this seam seems well beyond the realm of coincidence, and if I have to risk a lawsuit or a lynching to maintain that, so be it. But I can’t say what precisely to make of it. Did Brown sr. buy his way into the ranks of the post-coup elite by placing a special beacon on his desk as he left work on Monday, then slapping a homing device in his son’s luggage to guide the remote control system and then went golfing in the morning so he wouldn’t die? Avery seems to have been making such a claim, but it must be remembered that he thinks there was no Flight 77. Perhaps a planner or enabler of the attacks, aware that Brown jr. would die in the morning, orchestrated an enticing invite for his dad to a game of golf, to transform a brewing son’s-plane-kills-dad tragedy into a dad-in-on-9/11 conspiracy that would appear undeniably odd and intriguing to 9/11 Truthers. But if this was a seam left lying out, the backlash was built right in, and it may not be alone in that regard.

Sources:
[1] MSNBC, Sept. 25 2001. Found via "Killtown's 9/11 Coincidences and Oddities Page!" http://killtown.911review.org/oddities/911.html
[2] 2004-11-01 Dylan Avery Interview: M3U, RAM, MP3 http://911underground.com/wingtv/
[3] Ham, Mary Kataharine. "Beware the Truthers. Don't Ignore Them." Townhall.com September 11, 2006 http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=beware_the_truthers_dont_ignore_them&ns=MaryKatharineHam&dt=09/11/2006&page=1
[4] Posted by: Capitalistic Pig on September 13, 2006 01:43 AM comment on: “Speaking of Flaming Pieces of Shit...” Ace of Spades HQ. September 13, 2006. http://ace.mu.nu/archives/196495.php