Dear Prof. Sebok,
I read your article on FindLaw entitled "The District Court Decision in the Remaining 9/11 Litigation: Why Judge Hellerstein Was Wise to Dismiss Some of the Property Damage Claims".
While I note your legal skills in analyzing the decision, I wonder whether you have not seen the forest for the trees. Let me explain.
Your entire analysis is predicated on the facts, as they were presented by the US government and its agencies, regarding the events that took place on 9/11. These facts, or rathere allegations, include:
(1) That four aircraft were hijacked by 19 Muslim fanatics
(2) That two hijacked aircraft crashed on the World Trade Center buildings
Now, I do appreciate that this description was widely reported and is widely believed, even by educated people and by those who educate others. I have in fact tried, for more than four years, to locate evidence that supports this story. What I discovered, however, is that there exists not a shred of evidence supporting this legend. Sounds unbelievable? It does. Yet I have documented my search with almost 100 footnotes. Until today no one has challenged my findings:
(a) There is no evidence whatsoever that any Muslim fanatic boarded any of the four aircraft that reportedly crashed on 9/11. Their names do not appear on passenger lists; their boarding cards are nowhere to be found; no one has seen them board the aircraft; no video recordings document their boarding; and their bodily remains were not positively identified. If you don’t believe me, check it and you will discover that my statements are correct. No evidence that Muslims committed 9/11? Yes, that’s it. I add that I do not make any specific allegations who committed the crime, although I think that the lack of evidence suggests where to look for suspects.
(b) If real passenger aircraft actually crashed on the WTC, the Pentagon and in Pennsylvania – which might be the case – the fact is undisputed that the wreckage was not identified and linked to the passenger aircraft onto which the passengers and alleged hijackers allegedly boarded. The FBI declared that there was no need to positively identify the wreckage of the planes. The NTSB did not study the crash, as it the rule with aircraft crashes. So we do not know what actually crashed there, a civilian plane, a military plane, a missile… No one actually saw anything resembling an aircraft wreckage at any of these locations. This was particulary bizarre at the crash site in Pennsylvania where eyewitnesses who came to the crash site did not see anything reminding them of an aircraft, nor even any bodies or blood. The FBI, however, claimed later that it could recover 95% of the airplane from the Pennsylvania crash site, which according to them had plunged into the soft ground. The FBI then handed the whole recovered wreckage to United Airlines, with no witnesses attending. No person was, however, allowed to photograph the recovered wreckage. Bizarre.
Now, I wonder how you are able to remain oblivious to the above facts as a US legal journalist. After all 9/11 was a murder case and one would expect the government to prove its accusations against the alleged murderers. I would be most thankful for your explanation.
With kind greetings,