Dear Ms. Ashley, dear Mr. Hoffman,
recently, a friend of mine told me that you've published a short review of my article "The Cleveland Airport Mystery":
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/911reve... How excited I was when I opened the page where you mentioned the article (as part of a review of the book "9/11 revealed")! Can you imagine my disappointment when I learned that you view the article as a "hoax"?
Be assured, the facts gathered in the article are no hoax. Be assured, I don't spend hours, days, weeks in front of my computer screen, browsing the net for all possible combinations of certain keywords, only to publish a "hoax" to tease or deceive the 9/11 community.
The old, venerable BBC rule to support every claim with two independent sources was a strict guideline for me. These are the final words of the article: "Everybody who denies the occurring of two emergency landings should be able to provide us with clear answers to these five questions: When did the plane land, when was it evacuated, how many passengers dit it carry, where were they interviewed, where was the plan sitting at the airport. For every answer, he should also be able to disprove the contradicting two (or more) sources."
You obviously failed to fulfill these conditions, so I give you opportunity now to retrieve that. Your objection that the Cleveland events were nothing more than an "instance of confusion" is hardly a credible refutation, and, worse, it misses the point. Two different airplanes, both labeled as "Delta 1989", landed in Cleveland on 9/11. You certainly will agree that airplanes, unlike electrons, are no quantum objects, so Delta 1989 cannot have been at two different places at the same time. So if we assume one of the planes was indeed Delta 1989, what company and flight number was the other one?
"The Cleveland Airport Mystery" has been recommended not only by the authors of "9/11 revealed", but so different researchers like A.K. Dewdney, Nico Haupt, Mike Ruppert ("excellent research") and, just recently, Dylan Avery. My suggestion: let the readers of your review decide themselves if the article is a hoax, and install a link to the original URL:
http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/new... Sincerely,
Your Woody Box
