"Instead of being a 'traitor,' Lt. Col. Butler is a patriot in the truest sense of the word. As Thomas Jefferson said, 'What country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance?' Butler is also upholding international military code, which calls for officers to resist when their commanders are engaged in activities that violate the principles spelled out in the Nuremberg trials. In fact, by speaking out, Butler is upholding our own Declaration of Independence, which states our inalienable rights, then adds, 'To secure these rights... whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.'" So writes Cheryl Seal.

Air Force Lt. Co. Butler Prosecuted Illegally, Jet Fight Pilots Weigh in on 9/11, More Smoke From the Pentagon Crash

By Cheryl Seal

I would like to salute another brave "foot soldier" who is trying to defend America against the odds by speaking out: Air Force Lt. Col. Steve Butler. Butler was serving as vice chancellor for student affairs at the Defense Language Institute when he wrote a letter to the editor of his local paper, the Monterey Herald, which was published on May 26. The letter strongly suggested that Bush had created a war on terror to further his own political interests. In short, Butler spoke out, and he spoke the truth. There was an immediate retaliation from the "powers that be." Butler was accused of violating Article 88 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, an archaic rule which prohibits commissioned officers from using "contemptuous words" (just what this means is not made clear) against the president and other officials in the federal government.

Here's a link to the letter:

Now, as you will see upon reading Article 88 in its entirety, Col. Butler is being held illegally and those who caused him to be suspended from duty should be investigated and/or charge with a REAL VIOLATION of the military justice code. In the "explanation" section, the following directive is made: If not personally contemptuous, adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a POLITICAL DISCUSSION, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article.

These article were written back when public name calling and profanity were major taboos. It is clear that the rather Victorian reference in the Article to "contemptuous words," "certain words," "words of this kind" refers to the "unrepeatables." In item number two, under article "elements," it clearly states that the accused must be found to have "used certain words against an official or legislature named in the article." In other words, you can criticize a leader's politics, but you MAY NOT publicly call him an asshole or moron.

Here's the actual Article as written in the United States Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)

(The articles are divided into sections: text, elements, and explanation)

4.12.1 a. Text.

"Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct."

4.12.2 b. Elements.
(1) That the accused was a commissioned officer of the United States armed forces;

(2) That the accused used certain words (obviously this refers to profanities, which are absent from Butler's letter) against an official or legislature named in the article;

(3) That by an act of the accused these words came to the knowledge of a person other than the accused; and

(4) That the words used were contemptuous, either in themselves or by virtue of the circumstances under which they were used.

[Note: If the words were against a Governor or legislature, add the following element]

(5) That the accused was then present in the State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession of the Governor or legislature concerned.

4.12.3 c. Explanation.

The official or legislature against whom the words are used must be occupying one of the offices or be one of the legislatures named in Article 88 at the time of the offense. Neither "Congress" nor "legislature" includes its members individually. "Governor" does not include "lieutenant governor." It is immaterial whether the words are used against the official in an official or private capacity. If not personally contemptuous, adverse criticism of one of the officials or legislatures named in the article in the course of a political discussion, even though emphatically expressed, may not be charged as a violation of the article. Similarly, expressions of opinion made in a purely private conversation should not ordinarily be charged. Giving broad circulation to a written publication containing contemptuous words of the kind made punishable by this article, or the utterance of contemptuous words of this kind in the presence of military subordinates, aggravates the offense. The truth or falsity of the statements is immaterial. (i.e., doesn't matter if he really IS an asshole or moron, you can't call him that out loud or in print).

Back when Clinton was president, the Republican-dominated Congress and military (see "Rich, White and Republican" at had very little problem with "contemptuous words" against the president being flung wildly about - afterall, Clinton was a Democrat! In fact, letters by officers - including a notable letter by Marine Major Daniel Rabil - routinely appeared not just in the Navy newspaper, but the national mainstream meda. Rabil's letter ran in the Washington Times and from there was picked up by dozens of major outlets across the nation, including being cited on the Rush Limbaugh Show. The response from the brass? A few memos, a half-hearted "investigation." No action. No punishment.

Yet now, when a Lt. Col. in the Air Force speaks out - not because his commander-in-chief may have screwed around with an intern, but because his commander-in-chief may have ALLOWED thousands of Americans to be slaughtered, then lied about it - he is fired, and faces court martial. HELL-OOO!! What is wrong with this picture? It looks an awful lot like a closeup shot of Nazi Germany.

What really makes invoking this particular article all the more ominous and suspicious is that it has been declared the most vaguely worded and questionable of ALL the UCMJ articles and thus a major albatross. In fact, before his Heinous Bush came on the scene, Article 88, which was instituted officially in 1951 just as the insanity of the Cold War was really getting revved up, was up for review. The National Institute of Military Justice held a public hearing on March 13, 2001 at Geo. Washington U. Law school on areas of the Military Code that had been proposed for revision or elimination. One of those nominated for elimination (and at the very least revision) was Article 88.. The proposal reads: "Should Congress repeal Article 88, which prohibits officers from uttering contemptuous words regarding certain public officials, or at least limit it to active-duty personnel? " Also included in the list of white elephants and "military blue laws" nominated for the ax is a law against DUELING! So you get the picture. This is an archaic and probably illegally worded law whose only excuse for being was post-WWII, "Red Scare" paranoia.

The controversial prosecution of Article 88 against a junior officer who had participated in a protest of the Vietnam War in 1965 led to the case being taken to the Supreme Court. The Court's 1974 ruling made things even vaguer, however, by declaring that military personnel should enjoy the same first amendment protections of all Americans except in cases of "military necessity" - which, outrageously, was left undefined. At least until now. And, as we have seen, anything that works to further the interests of G.W. Bush is considered a necessity - military and otherwise.

Bottom line is, instead of being a "traitor," Lt. Col. Butler is a patriot in the truest, most fundamental sense of the word. As Thomas Jefferson once said, ""what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance?" Butler is also upholding international military code, which calls for officers to resist and speak up when they believe their commanders are engaged in activities that violate the Geneva code and the principles spelled out in the Nurember trials.

In fact, by speaking out against a destructive government, Butler is upholding our own Declaration of Independence.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

In fact, In fact, anyone NOT speaking up right now to defend America against the greedy corporate marauders who call themselves our "leaders" have failed in their duty as Americans.


Cheryl -

THANKS....BUSH either ordered the attacks on 9 - 11, or allowed the attacks....and, to insure the attacks were successful...He ordered the Military to STAND DOWN....

I was a Jet Fighter Pilot....I would have been in the air within 2 minutes in full burner....and, if NORAD ordered the shoot down - they would have been shot down...End of discussion...


Dr. Richard Morgan

Another Fighter Pilot Speaks Out

When Smoking Gun was posted at another site, the following link to an article by another fighter pilot was posted in response:

The URL for the response is;article=28547;show_parent=1.


An information "newshound" that has been following Smoking Gun has compiled the following selection of links to add to our "Pentagon Files." The Pentagon appears to be the weakest link in the chain forged by the perpetrators of 9/11 and, I predict, the one that will cause it ultimately to break. With this amount of fishy and conflicting evidence and disturbing eyewitness observations, a major outside investigation is not only called for - it is SCREAMED for! And, if one is not conducted, that failure to act, in and of itself, may constitute the most damning piece of evidence of all.

The astute comments between links are from my reader (who prefers anonymity).,11209,663990,00.html

Que Milagro!

For one employee with Wedge One's mechanical subcontractor John J. Kirlin Inc., Rockville MD, "lucky" is an understatement. "We had one guy who was standing, looking out the window and saw the plane when it was coming in. He was in front of one of the blast-resistant windows," says Kirlin President Wayne T. Day, who believes the window structure saved the man's life. According to Matt Hahr, Kirlin's senior project manager at the Pentagon, the employee "was thrown about 80 ft down the hall through the air. As he was traveling through the air, he says the ceiling was coming down from the concussion. He got thrown into a closet, the door slammed shut and the fireball went past him," recounts Hahr. "Jet fuel was on him and it irritated his eyes, but he didn't get burned. Then the fireball blew over and the sprinklers came on, and he was able to crawl out of the closet and get out of the building through the courtyard."

It appears likely that the plane that hit the Pentagon was in fact intended to do so. (There has been speculation that this plane was targeted on the White House or capital.) The plane never entered the restricted air zone and its 270-degree turn seems to have been intended to slow down and lose altitude to set up the proper glide path for a Pentagon attack. (reducing the F=ma?)

The Pentagon is a huge building, and has been rebuilt, refurbished, and remodeled (in rotating stages) since it was completed at the end of World War II. Not surprisingly, the newly renovated sections did better in the aftermath of the attack that sections that have not been reworked in recent decades. The water sprinklers in older areas are not up to code, and the fire spread into those areas. Areas which had the fire sprinklers upgraded tended to survive. Some of the building's windows have been replaced by blast proof laminated types. In the original construction, the military used the minimum amount of steel (which was in short supply due to the war); renovated sections were rebuilt with more steel (and with steel columns wrapped with composite sheets to cut down on fragmentation) and survived better.(so if it had hit any other wedge, the Pentagon would have been totalled?)

It was 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, September 11th, and traffic was terrible. For all of my twenty-eight years living in the Washington, D.C. area, terrible traffic was a constant.

Va. — Traffic headed south on Interstate 395 just across the Potomac River and Washington, D.C. was light, but I was late for work and it was after the thick of the rush hour, about 9:30 a.m. Securities and Exchange Commission dropped its investigation of Alexandria's Halifax Corp. without recommending any enforcement action, 17 months after the probe began and more than three years after embezzlement by a company executive was disclosed, a Halifax official said yesterday. Halifax announced yesterday that it was awarded a $3 million contract with the Army Corps of Engineers to install a communications network.

BAE Systems North America is lobbying Pentagon officials for permission to acquire TRW Inc., potentially setting up a bidding war for the aerospace and auto parts company with Northrop Grumman Corp., according to sources familiar with the situation. BAE Systems North America will have to overcome its British parent company's distinction as Europe's largest defense contractor to convince Pentagon and Justice Department officials that the U.S. arm of the company, which is based in Rockville, operates independently. Its board of directors is filled with former high-ranking U.S. military officials, they argue.

OK Cheryl,
Washington Post says that a commuter plane with 8 to 12 on board is what clunked the Pentagon. That, I can buy. The math fits better. Steve Patterson, 43, said he was watching television reports of the World Trade Center being hit when he saw a silver commuter jet fly past the window of his 14th-floor apartment in Pentagon City. The plane was about 150 yards away, approaching from the west about 20 feet off the ground, Patterson said.He said the plane, which sounded like the high-pitched squeal of a fighter jet, flew over Arlington cemetery so low that he thought it was going to land on I-395. He said it was flying so fast that he couldn't read any writing on the side.The plane, which appeared to hold about eight to 12 people, headed straight for the Pentagon but was flying as if coming in for a landing on a nonexistent runway, Patterson said."At first I thought 'Oh my God, there's a plane truly misrouted from National,'" Patterson said. "Then this thing just became part of the Pentagon .‚.‚. I was watching the World Trade Center go and then this. It was like Oh my God, what's next?"He said the plane, which approached the Pentagon below treetop level, seemed to be flying normally for a plane coming in for a landing other than going very fast for being so low. Then, he said, he saw the Pentagon "envelope" the plane and bright orange flames shoot out the back of the building. So, you probably already found this on your own but here it is nonetheless.It is a VERY good mamalink.

Send To Printer