"Danish PM: 'I had Tip-off Towers Would Collapse'"
Mort Zuckerman
scientifi...@ostp.gov, pkru...@princeton.edu,
Stanle...@fiu.edu, emcsw...@niaid.nih.gov, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net,
jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov,
michae...@po.state.ct.us, con...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
edi...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com, news-
ti...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com,
nati...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net,
tr...@hotmail.com, illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com,
tinaj...@yahoo.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
georg...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, brans...@comcast.net,
vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us, freet...@charter.net,
scott....@po.state.ct.us, govern...@po.state.ct.us,
attorney...@po.state.ct.us, randall...@usdoj.gov,
Robert....@yale.edu, edi...@greenwich-post.com,
harol...@yale.edu, sedm...@nswbc.org, rrmcg...@aol.com,
fr...@nytimes.com, dpr...@stmartin.edu
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com, rast...@aol.com,
billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, sidney_b...@yahoo.com,
criminal...@usdoj.gov, karla.d...@usdoj.gov,
christophe...@usdoj.gov, richar...@yale.edu,
harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu, inq...@aldf.com,
ly...@idsociety.org, meganm...@theatlantic.com,
bob.d...@latimes.com
Subject: "Danish PM: 'I had Tip-off Towers Would Collapse'"
Date: Nov 3, 2009 6:44 AM
http://www.actionlyme.org
Israeli pundits and their Mossad ilk
Perle/Feith/Wolfowitz speak "code
language" to each other. They publish
their wishes right out in the open:
http://www.iasps.org/strat1.htm
http://www.actionlyme.org/PNAC.pdf
http://www.reinvestigate911.org/
October 30, 2009
Saturday 31 October: Full Page Newspaper Ad
The ad is due to run in the Independent, the UK's most serious
newspaper, read by MPs and others in the elite. These people have the
greatest difficulty accepting that 9/11 was most likely some sort of
an inside job, so we have been careful not to go an inch beyond the
provable facts. Click here to see a full-size version of the ad.
The ad has been financed by Coffee Plant, organic Fairtrade coffee
bean suppliers and retailers (www.coffee.uk.com). Already
Reinvestigate 911 has received some 10% of the costs from supporters,
if most of the remaining costs are defrayed by donations Coffee Plant
will do the same again. To donate click on the "support us" button to
the left or call Coffee Plant on 0208 453 1144 with your credit card
details.
Monday November 2: Public Meeting in London, Private Meeting in House
of Commons
Please contact your MP to press them to attend the meeting, see below.
The list of speakers is the same for both meetings (with video and
audio from several others).
SCOTT FORBES is a British victim of the 9/11 attacks. Scott had the
trauma of seeing many colleagues die as the Twin Towers collapsed
opposite his New York flat. He was off work after attending to a power
down the weekend before the disaster. Workers were recabling the
building. The media and the 9/11 Commission have refused to
investigate what was going on. Scott is not making allegations, he
just wants to know the truth.
NIELS HARRIT is an expert on nanotechnology. His suspicions were
aroused when he saw the rapid symmetrical collapse of Building 7,
which took place hours after the attacks took place. The media
announced the collapse before it happened but it took Bush's
scientists years to offer any sort of explanation. They have admitted
the collapse was at free fall speed. Niels has analysed dust samples
from the site and found some bizarre high energy particles which seem
to be artifical.
IAN HENSHALL is the author of 911 The New Evidence. He is suspicious
of the paper trail: warnings ignored, FBI investigations blocked prior
to 9/11 and a series of "exercises" including a "hijack exercise"
taking place on the day of the attacks.
MPs are increasingly taking an interest in the holes and
inconsistencies of the official 9/11 story. PLEASE CALL YOUR MP as a
constituent to draw their attention to the invitation they have
received. Phone the House of Commons on 0207 219 3000 and ask to be
put through or better still ask for a meeting. Alternatively fax them
by going to www.writetothem.com Please remember that for people in the
establishment the idea that the 9/11 official story is false is hard
to accept, especially during a hurried conversation. All you may have
time for is to explain that the 911 Commission is discredited and no
solid evidence has been produced to cover many aspects of the official
story. Beyond that, we advise you not to try to argue with them. We
will send a free copy of 911 The New Evidence to any MP or assistant
promising to read it. Please make sure to email us with their
reaction, particularly if they are at all sympathetic.
PUBLIC MEEETING DETAILS
7.30 PM Monday November 2, School of Oriental and African Studies,
Russell Square, WC1H 0XG
Room B111, Brunei Building, opposite main building
Entrance free, priority to supporters of Reinvestigate 911 who have
made a donation
Directions:
Russell Square tube in Central London.
Walk west along north side of Russell Square to Thornhaugh Street.
October 23, 2009
Danish PM: I had Tip-off Towers Would Collapse
Poul Rasmussen, Prime Minister of Denmark on September 11 2001, has
told TV viewers he was personally tipped off that the first of the
Twin Towers was going to collapse some ten minutes before the event.
To those without curiosity over the events of 9/11 this may not seem
significant, after all the media tell us experts have proved
scientifically that the Towers were always going to collapse.
But US government scientists took more than two years to come up with
an explanation for the spectacular collapse of the Twin Towers, and
another two years to explain the free fall collapse of WTC7 (which had
not been hit by a plane) later in the day. Who figured out the
building would collapse some thirty minutes after the South Tower was
hit by a plane and ten minutes before the collapse happened?
Apparently not any architect or engineer. In an extensive
investigation The New Yorker magazine could not find one expert who
thought at the time that the Twin Towers would collapse after the
plane impacts and fires. This is no surprise. The Empire State
Building was hit by a plane years before the plans for the Towers were
proposed, so there was a very public debate culminating in a general
acceptance that the design could easily withstand one, some said
several, plane impacts. And planes at the time the Towers were built
were just as big, just as fast and, despite strange suggestions in the
corporate media to the contrary, planners knew that a colliding plane
would have fuel on board too.
In fact the super fast, symmetrical and total collapses have still not
been scientifically explained. The NIST (National Institute of
Standards and Technology, part of the Commerce Department) report,
based on secret evidence, secret computer models, never peer reviewed,
and written by government scientists whose ultimate employer was
President Bush, was about as scientific as the inquisition. It took
several alterations to the secret computer models (according to sacked
whistleblower Kevin Ryan) to get the desired answer. Even then they
could not find any evidence that the fires reached the high
temperatures their theory required. The report ended at the moment
when the collapse began, thus failing to explain the most bizarre
features of the event.
The question remains: who figured out that the architecture and
engineering professions would get it wrong, and phoned the Danish PM
to let him know? It wasn't the firefighters: chiefs were planning to
set up a station a few floors below the seat of the fires. Two
firefighters had reached the fires and radioed to say they were
manageable with two hoses. One was the Fire Department's terrorism
expert who had made a study of the structure of the Towers. Fire
chiefs told the media that a total collapse was "the farthest thing
from our minds".
Some 9/11 sceptics have an explanation: it was whoever recabled the
Towers in the weeks before 9/11, and encouraged Mayor Giulliani's team
to leave their emergency management centre in WTC7 which collapsed
later in the day. The team were part of Dick Cheney's anti-terrorism
exercise which involved a fake hijacking and a disaster in New York. A
smoking gun, say sceptics, a simple coincidence, say the corporate
media.
If experts and the media had blown the whistle on the controlled
demolitions, say sceptics, it would have been presented as a desperate
act of necessity to make sure the buildings came down in their own
footprint, minimising the damage. But this would be the fallback
position, or limited hangout in CIA jargon. To keep the story simple,
and avoid public suspicions and expensive lawsuits, top politicians
and the media were told in advance to expect a spontaneous collapse,
say sceptics.
This is clearly a case for the BBC's Conspiracy Files. But the BBC had
a tip-off too. Recently a video surfaced of a BBC reporter announcing
that the third building that day, WTC7, had already collapsed while
viewers could plainly see it still intact in the background behind the
reporter (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s&feature=related)
So how will the BBC Conspiracy Files react to the news? Will they go
back to their sources, ask Rasmussen where the tip-off came from or
perhaps ask 10 Downing Street if they had a tip-off too? Unlikely.
"Due impariality" though an obligation incorporated by law into the
BBC's royal charter, in practice extends to giving a platform to nazis
but not to 9/11 sceptics.
The BBC are ultimately paid by the UK government, so they will
probably choose to stand shoulder to shoulder with the scientists at
NIST, paid by the White House, and wait for the next official report.
This might take several more years, especially if NIST are called on
to explain the droplets of molten iron and traces of nano-thermite (an
explosive/incendiary agent used in controlled demolitions) recently
found in samples of WTC dust by independent experts.
In the meanwhile, since 9/11, there's always a war somewhere to report
on.
September 6, 2009
Report the 9/11 debate honestly: September 11 demo outside the BBC
Activist group London Truth Action are picketing the BBC from 12.00pm
to 8.00pm this Friday September 11. Reinvestigate 911 supports this
picket and calls on all who doubt the 9/11 official story to assemble.
Co-ordinators of Reinvestigate 911 will be available to meet
supporters and for media interviews between 4.00 and 6.00pm.
The BBC has reported that it intends to give a place on Question Time
to the right wing BNP, recognising its legal obligation under a rule
known as "due impartiality". Reinvestigate 911 deplores the fact that
the BBC has ignored repeated requests to apply this rule to us.
Instead they have produced a series of programmes (The Conspiracy
Files) featuring wild speculation by radicals, half truths and smears,
while refusing mainstream 9/11 sceptics any right of reply.
It appears the BBC only airs doubts over the official 9/11 story when
they think they have evidence to refute them, evidence they present
uncritically without giving sceptics a chance to reply. The BBC
website still has an article rushed out soon after 9/11 quoting an
"expert" as saying the Twin Towers collapsed because the fires caused
the steel beams to melt, a view that has since been refuted by
scientists on both sides of the 9/11 debate. Another article contains
a structural diagram of the Twin Towers which entirely omits the
massive load bearing central columns.
More recently the BBC has failed to report on the peer reviewed paper
by Danish chemistry professor Niels Harrit, who has found highly
energetic thermate type nano-particles in several samples of dust from
Ground Zero in New York, an indication that explosives were involved
in the rapid collapse of the three buildings (WTC 7 collapsed in a
similar symmetrical and rapid way to WTC 1 and 2 later on the day of
the attacks though it had not been hit by any aircraft). The BBC de
facto censorship has been maintained even after Harrit flew to the UK
and impressed a House of Commons meeting in July.
We are disturbed by the allegation from far right activist Martin
Webster that the BNP has done a backdoor deal to get access to the
media in return for the BNP dropping anti-Semitism and instead
targeting Muslims. The BNP's support for Israel's attacks on Gaza
seems to vindicate Webster's theory. We call on the BBC to refute this
allegation and explain why due impartiality is applied to the BNP but
not to Reinvestigate 911.
Here is one blog presenting criticism of the BBC sent in by a
supporter of Reinvestigate 911 (but please note that we do not
necessarily endorse the content of this or any other link on this
site) www.bbc.mot.blogspot.com
September 6, 2009
FBI translator and whistleblower: CIA was working with Al Qaeda right
up to 9/11
At the heart of the official 9/11 story lies the assertion that the
CIA had cut off all contacts with alleged 9/11 godfather Osama bin
Laden years before the 9/11 attacks. This would be unusual behaviour
for an intelligence agency and there have been many allegations to the
contrary.
French mainstream media reported widely that in the weeks before 9/11
Osama bin Laden was in high level meetings with the local CIA station
officer in Dubai, under cover of receiving hospital treatment.
Unsurprisingly the doctor concerned refused to comment publicly and US/
UK media mostly failed to report the story.
Now the CIA/Al Qaeda link has been corroborated by whistleblower Sibel
Edmonds who was given the job of translating intercepts for the FBI
after 9/11. When she started to go public on the corruption and double
dealing she had become aware of through her work she was gagged by the
Bush White House, but that gag that has now been lifted. Edmonds has
distanced herself from the 9/11 truth movement, so her recent
statement is all the more significant: Osama bin Laden was indeed in
contact with the CIA right up to the 9/11 attacks. In our view this
alone should justify a new investigation into whether Washington has
been lying, and what else they may have been lying about.
The case of Ali Mohammed presents another problem for the official
story. Investigative journalist Peter Lance (Triple Cross, published
by Regan books) has established that Mohammed trained the 1993 World
Trade Centre bombers while working as a special forces instructor at
Fort Bragg, that he helped to train Osama Bin Laden's personal
bodyguard and expedited his 1995 move from Sudan to Afghanistan after
the US government refused an offer from Sudan to extradite him to the
US.
Many suspect the CIA/Al Qaeda ties did not end with 9/11. Respected
journalist Seymour Hersh reported that the Pentagon was sponsoring
radical Sunni expansion into Lebanon, and a few months later "Al Qaeda
in Lebanon" appeared .
September 6, 2009
Japan: Democratic Party victory propels prominent 9/11 sceptic to
government benches
One of the planet's most prominent 9/11 sceptics and leader of
politicians for 9/11 truth, Yukihisa Fujita, is a senior government
Senator after the Democratic Party of Japan swept to power last week.
Fujita, a prominent supporter of humanitarian and peace issues, has
said that the Japanese government should not accept the official US
story without conducting its own investigation of 9/11. Unlike the UK,
where Michael Meacher was hounded by the media after writing that the
war on terror was a fraud, in Japan the media have been more even
handed, so it will be interesting to see what happens next.
September 6, 2009
Date confirmed for second House of Commons meeting
The second Reinvestigate 911 Commons meeting has been fixed for Monday
November 2, following the success of the July meeting which drew
several MPs, peers and researchers (unlike most campaigns who have
lots of activists but no MPs present). Please ask your MP or any peer
you know to look out for their email invitation and come to the
meeting where a series of key speakers will be answering questions.
The goal is to confront the various smears we face and break the media
embargo on 911 doubts. Only those activists who are involved in the
lobbying effort will be invited. If you would like to get involved
beyond lobbying your own MP (we assume you would do that anyway)
please contact us at crisisne...@pro-net.co.uk
July 16, 2009
Reinvestigate 911 Breaks into Parliament
In a breakthrough for campaigners, a meeting has been held in the new
Parliamentary extension Portcullis House at which speakers challenged
the official story of the 9/11 attacks. This was the first time since
the attacks nearly eight years ago that MPs and Peers heard - on their
own premises - the widespread view outside it: that 9/11 might have
been an inside job.
A followup meeting is pencilled in for November 2. Reinvestigate 911
is calling for members of the public to alert their MPs to this.
A previous meeting was abandoned after the MP who had booked the room
cancelled at short notice, after apparently being pressured. One UK
based intelligence expert and 9/11 sceptic who frequently addresses
academic audiences described the meeting as a breakthrough.
Only a few MPs and Peers attended the meeting in person, but others
sent assistants, gave support for future meetings or asked for a
report of the meeting. This includes well known and senior figures,
but to protect politicians from the predictable attacks and smears
from those who support the official 9/11 story, organisers are not
releasing names at this stage.
November 2 is pencilled in for a followup meeting, with foreign
politicians and experts expected to attend. In the runup to that
meeting Reinvestigate 911 will be exploring with sympathetic MPs and
Peers various plans for raising Parliamentary and media interest in
discovering the full story behind the 9/11 attacks.
June 28, 2009
House of Commons meeting to discuss 911 attacks
Reinvestigate 9/11 has invited all MPs and Peers to a seminar on the
9/11 attacks, taking place on July 6. This is the first time such a
meeting has been held in the Palace of Westminster and will upset
journalists and editors in the mainstream corporate media who deny
that there are any legitimate doubts over the official 9/11 story.
A room in the Palace of Westminster can only be booked by an MP or
Peer. A previous meeting was cancelled at short notice by 9/11 sceptic
and senior Labour MP Michael Meacher. The explanation remains murky.
Reinvestigate 911 is calling on members of the public to approach
their MP as a constituent. Please either go to http://www.writetothem.com/
to fax or email, or call the Commons switchboard on 0207 219 3000. Ask
to speak to your MP and you will be connected to their office. Other
MPs should not be approached.
June 22, 2009
New York Campaign Update
Campaigners in New York are close to forcing New York State to hold a
genuine investigation into the 9/11 attacks. A petition is being
collected and now has over 52,000 signatures, which if they are all
valid will force the authorities to put the inquiry proposal on the
ballot at the next elections in the autumn. If voters then support
the call for a new enquiry it will go ahead with full subpoena powers
and serious open minded investigators in charge.
One such investigator is William Pepper the man who established that,
contrary to the official story, Martin Luther King was indeed killed
as part of a conspiracy. Pepper persuaded a jury of this in a civil
case in the 1990's but the verdict was largely ignored by the
corporate media.
Only New Yorkers can sign the petition, but donations are welcome to
help pay for the massive operation needed to collect so many
signatures. To contribute go to their web site, New York CAN where
9/11 victims, truth campaigners and first responders all demand the
full story.
May, 2009
Obama CIA Chief: Cheney almost wishing for another 9/11
In a deeply significant intervention in the 9/11 saga Obama's CIA
chief Leon Panetta has accused Dick Cheney of "dangerous politics".
Panetta told The New Yorker in response to Cheney's recent media
campaign in support of the Bush/Cheney torture policies: "When you
read behind it, it's almost as if he's wishing that this country would
be attacked again in order to prove his point".
Panetta did not publicly say that Cheney wished at the time for 9/11
to enable the Bush political agenda, but his highly unusual comments
pointed to this possibility. Normally the mainstream US media maintain
a polite discourse which consigns such ideas to the realm of
"conspiracy theories".
The record shows that before 9/11 the Bush White House along with CIA
director George Tenet were making detailed plans for the invasion of
Iraq even though, as Rumsfeld told the 9/11 Commission, the invasion
of Afghanistan was out of the question politically at that stage.
Some 9/11 sceptics believe the Bush White House inherited a relatively
harmless CIA plan to engineer an attack in the US, and drastically
upped the ante to create a bloodbath and use the ensuing hysteria to
enable the invasion of Iraq. Panetta was chief of staff in the Clinton
White House and would have been aware of any CIA plans in the pipeline
at the time.
April 02, 2009
Leading 911 sceptic to visit London Tuesday 14 April
Professor David Ray Griffin will be speaking at the City University,
Northampton Square EC1, London at 7.00 pm
Nearest underground: Angel tube station. Tickets £5 from www.timeforasecondlook.com
David Ray Griffin, perhaps the planet's leading 9/11 sceptic, was
dismissed as an unnamed "theology professor" by The Guardian's George
Monbiot in his hysterical attack on 911 sceptics last year, in which
he accused them of being "morons" who believe in magic.
The truth is different. Griffin's 35 books (the titles of which can be
seen at Amazon) include several that deal with the philosophy of
science. Griffin's definitive treatment of 9/11 to date, "The New
Pearl Harbor Revisited," was named "Pick of the Week" last November by
the authoritative Publishers Weekly.
(Monbiot's judgement, on the other hand, seems to have been informed
by little more than a biology degree, a tough deadline and the need to
provide the lively copy expected of highly paid Fleet Street
columnists. His views are not shared by Lynn Margulis one of the
world's leading biologists, currently a visiting professor at Oxford
University, who recently gave support to 9/11 sceptics.)
Griffin's views on the impossible official story of the 911 attacks
are increasingly shared by independent scientists with expertise in
relevant fields (see for instance the recent blog from Egypt), several
of whom have endorsed his books - the next of which will be titled:
"The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final
Official Report about 9/11 is Unscientific and False."
Reinvestigate911 does not necessarily endorse all of DRG's views and
arguments, but his case is certainly as strong as can be made prior to
an independent investigation with subpoena power. In "9/11
Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press," he showed
that the official story about 9/11 is riddled with internal
contradictions. For example, the FBI now contradicts its earlier
reports about the alleged phone calls from the planes. It denies that
the famous calls from Flight 77 made by CNN commentator Barbara Olson
to her husband, Ted Olson (then the Solicitor General for the
Department of Justice), ever happened. And it denies that any high-
altitude mobile phone calls were made from the airliners.
To find out more about how the official 9/11 story cannot stand up,
join David Ray Griffin on Tuesday.
See also press release re. DRG's tour on www.london911truth.org.uk
"911: The New Evidence" makes big splash in Middle east
While the US escalates its war in Afghanistan 9/11, doubts are
increasing in the Muslim world.
US policy seems set on a collision course, not only with the people of
Afghanistan and Pakistan but intellectuals across the Muslim world who
increasingly doubt the official story of the 9/11 attacks, the US's
main justification for escalating the war. Many believe 9/11 was an
inside job to convince Americans and Europeans that pre-planned wars
of aggression were actually self defence.
In the declining days of the British Empire and the Suez fiasco, Cairo
was the heart of an earlier anti-colonial struggle. In February 2009,
half a century later, a crowded meeting of around 200 people responded
to a small ad in Al Ahram to attend the Cairo launch of the Arabic
language translation of 9/11 The New Evidence. The seminar was later
aired in full on Al Jazeera's streaming news channel, Al Jazeera
(Mubasher).
(Continues here)
March 15, 2009
Political leaders follow medics, religious leaders, form 9/11 truth
groups
The war in Iray may be winding down, but the eight year war in
Afghanistan is certainly set to escalate, with no exit strategy and no
end in sight. The most common justification is that "Al Qaeda" must
not be allowed a safe haven or we will risk "another 9/11". So it's
not surprising that more and more intellectuals and experts are
putting their heads over the parapet to challenge the official story
of the 9/11 attacks.
In the last few months Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has
been joined by Medical Professionals for 9/11 Truth, Religious Leaders
for 9/11 Truth and now, most recently, Political Leaders for 9/11
Truth. Most sceptics are unsure of the real story of the collapse of
the Twin Towers and the attack on the Pentagon, but all agree that the
legend of diabolically skilled Al Qaeda operatives who succeeded in
evading US immigration controls, tricking the CIA, evading at least
two separate teams of FBI officers hot on their trail, hijacking
planes without even one official hijack warning from the eight pilots
and co-pilots (most of them ex-military), and achieving navigational
and targeting successes that would shame most experienced pilots,
seems pretty unlikely.
Political leaders are wondering why the Bush cabinet had, top of the
agenda, detailed plans for the invasion of Iraq in February 2001,
eight months before the 9/11attacks took place. All commentators agree
it was only 9/11 which made the attack on Iraq remotely politically
feasible. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, who has revealed this, says
cabinet discussions were joined by CIA boss George Tenet. Tenet told
the 911 Commission he had not met Bush in the weeks before the
attacks, but later said he "forgot" about flying to Texas for an all
day meeting with Bush and the Chiefs of Staff. Days after the attacks,
Tenet and Cofer Black, head of counterterrorism at the CIA (whose
department, instead of stopping the attacks, failed to pass on vital
information to the FBI) were presenting Bush with detailed plans for
the notorious torture network, and a multibillion dollar budget
increase.
Unusually for the US corporate media, CBS has run a serious interview
with Political Leaders' co-founder Robert Bowman.
The end of the Bush "reign of terror" in Washington has given
campaigners the opportunity to demand accountability. As 9/11 victims
relatives put it in an open letter to Senator Leahy (who is proposing
a Truth Commission to look into the Bush regime):
"At the 9/11 Commission hearings, little actual evidence was ever
produced. Many individuals were not sworn in... Whistleblower
testimony was suppressed or avoided all together... With the narrative
of the 9/11 Commission's final report predetermined and with the
preexisting intention to never hold anyone accountable in place ...
completing that investigation should also be included on your list of
matters to be examined."
February 27, 2009
Plane Crash Widow Campaigned for 9/11 Investigation
The 9/11 widow who died in the recent crash in New York doubted the
truth of the official story of the 9/11 attacks. Beverly Eckert was so
sure the US government are still hiding important information that she
waived an automatic seven figure compensation pay-out. In order to
force further investigations she refused to sign an undertaking to
give up all her rights.
[]
Douglas Healey/Associated Press
September 11 relatives who accepted settlements forfeited their right
to sue the airlines, airports, security companies, or other US
organizations. Ms Eckert was suing the US government. In a statement
she issued entitled My Silence Cannot Be Bought she wrote:
"I am suing because unlike other investigative avenues my lawsuit
requires all testimony be given under oath and fully uses powers to
compel evidence." (http://www.nydailynews.com/forums/thread.jspa?
threadID=50344&start=20&tstart=0)
Beverly Eckert and her fellow campaigners should not be dismissed as
"conspiracy theorists". Many of them are victims of 9/11, have studied
the large amount information released by official sources and
concluded that the official 9/11 story does not add up.
The corporate media in the UK played up the tragedy last week, casting
Beverly Eckert as a hero, but generally failing to mention her
campaign, which led to the formation of the Washington's 9/11
Commission. The Commission reported in 2005 but Chair Thomas Keane
later admitted it had been "set up to fail" by the Bush White House.
A spokesman for Reinvestigate 9/11 said:
"Newspapers fear a haemorrhage of credibility from another weapons-of-
mass-destruction type scandal if the official story of the 9/11
attacks turns out to be substantially wrong. They are operating de
facto censorship and denying basic democratic debate in pursuit of an
industry vendetta against what they call '9/11 conspiracy theorists'.
It is sickening that they would insult her memory by denying even in
death her right to ask questions about the 9/11 attacks".
Contact: Ian Henshall. 079469 39217
Notes
1. It may be that the new White House team is as sceptical of 9/11 and
the CIA as the US public appears to be. According to opinion polls,
85% agree with the proposition that the US government is hiding
things. Along with Ms Eckert at the White House meeting were survivors
of the attack USS Cole, allegedly carried out by Al Qaeda while the
ship was refuelling in the port of Aden on Oct 12 2000.
2. The media have speculated that icing was the cause of the crash but
so far no direct evidence of that has emerged from forensic tests or
from pilot tapes. The plane had extensive protective equipment against
icing. With Beverly Eckert such a high profile 9/11 truth campaigner
and respected by the new President, there has been speculation that
the plane was sabotaged.
3. Here are the original questions asked by Beverly Eckert and her
fellow campaigners. Mist have still not been answered by official
sources to date.
http://www.911independentcommission.org/questions.html
February 06, 2009
Senior US Terror Official: Official 9/11 Story Not Credible
Terrell (Terry) E. Arnold a senior Washington anti-terror boss has
spoken out on the 9/11 attacks, saying the official case is unproven
and contradicted by the evidence. This follows leaks (see earlier
blogs) from FBI officials on secondment to the CIA at the time,
claiming that the CIA not only blocked the FBI probes that would have
aborted the 9/11 attacks but did this deliberately. Here are extracts
from Arnold's interview with the George Washington blogspot, an
excellent 9/11 source...
Terrell (Terry) E. Arnold was the number 2 counter-terrorism official
at the U.S. State Department, and is one of the world's leading
experts on terror.
Arnold served as the Deputy Director, Office of Counter-Terrorism and
Emergency Planning, at the U.S. State Department. He is also the
former Chairman of the Department of International Studies at the
National War College.
GW: You write:
"Washington leadership [has] brought us no closer than we were on
September 12, 2001 to resolving how [9/11] was executed and by what
enemy.
Let's focus on the how question first.
What facts or observations make you doubt that the official government
story does not fully explain how 9/11 was carried out?
Terry Arnold: The nature of events in New York. The buildings falling
down. I'm not satisfied by the notion that planes hitting buildings
would have caused them to collapse. The last building to fall was not
even attacked.
GW: Now let's address the question of who carried out the attacks. You
write:
"They tell us repeatedly that it [9/11] was the work of al Qaida,
but they have yet to show us the proofs."
As a counter-terrorism expert, what sort of proofs would you expect
the government to show if al Qaeda had carried out the 9/11 attacks -
at least without the help of any state?
Terry Arnold: The case has not been fully made. The official story is
not too persuasive.
Publishers' Weekly Picks 9/11 Book
Here is a significant item we should have posted in November. The
gretest obstacle to the truth about the 9/11 attacks is undoubtedly
the uncritical acceptance of the official story by corporate
journalists and more importantly editors and executives. These people
have an air of authority - undeserved, when you consider the lies
about Iraq's WMD and the failure to report the significance of the
Project for a New American Century's plans for world domination,
published before the 9/11 attacks. So whenever experts from outside
the Washington led media mafia endorse 9/11scepticism it is
significant. Publishers Weekly is the BBC of publishing. Here is an
email from Ray Griffin...
"The New Pearl Harbor Revisited", by Dr. David Ray Griffin, has been
named "Pick of the Week" by Publishers Weekly, November 24, 2008.
In 2004, when David Ray Griffin published his first book about 9/11,
"The New Pearl Harbor", the book was largely overlooked by mainstream
sources. Now Griffin's seventh book about 9/11, "The New Pearl Harbor
Revisited", has been named "Web Pick of the Week" by Publishers Weekly
Weekly reviews from this trusted and prestigious publisher have guided
the book trade, including booksellers, publishers, librarians, and
literary agents, for 136 years
Dr. Griffin's book can be found at good bookstores or purchased at a
discounted price from 911Truth.org (http://www.911truthstore.com/
index.php?cPath=2&sort=1a&page=5) or from Amazon.com (http://
www.amazon.com/New-Pearl-Harbor-Revisited-Cover-Up/dp/1566567297/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1227558585&sr=1-1).
Top TV Drama Leads with 9/11 Accusations
The 9/11 Truth movement has always maintained that it will be
impossible to suppress the truth for ever, but it is hard to predict
just how the dam will burst. Who would have expected a Murdoch-owned
TV show to feature detailed and articulate criticisms of the official
9/11 story? Here is the New York Times version (as it is fair and
factual one can conclude it was written by someone from outside their
hopeless news department)
The Political Suspicions of 9/11
By BRIAN STELTER
Published: February 1, 2009
A coming episode of the acclaimed FX drama "Rescue Me" will tackle
what may sound like a far-fetched plot line: that the attacks of Sept.
11 were an "inside job." The actor who espouses the theories on
camera, it turns out, also subscribes to them in real life. The actor
Daniel Sunjata calls the attacks an "inside job."
Claims that terrorists were not solely responsible for the attacks
have a lively following on the Internet, including on YouTube, but the
second episode of "Rescue Me’s" fifth season, starting in April, may
represent the first fictional presentation of 9/11 conspiracy theories
by a mainstream media company (FX is operated by the News
Corporation).
"They’re not discussed a lot in the press," Daniel Sunjata, the actor
who plays Franco Rivera on "Rescue Me," told reporters at a television
press tour last month. He predicted that the episode would be "socio-
politically provocative."
In the episode, Mr. Sunjata’s character delivers a two-minute
monologue for a French journalist describing a "neoconservative
government effort" to control the world’s oil, drastically increase
military spending and "change the definition of pre-emptive attack."
To put it into action, he continues, "what you need is a new Pearl
Harbor. That’s what they said they needed."
Mr. Sunjata surprised some of the TV reporters when he said that he
"absolutely, 100 percent" supports the assertion that "9/11 was an
inside job."
The alternative theories "seem to me to make a lot more sense than the
ones that are popularly espoused," he said, calling it admirable that
the conversation was allowed within "Rescue Me."
Peter Tolan, an executive producer, said Mr. Sunjata is "well read"
and has "done a lot of research."
"Look, obviously not all of us buy in," he told reporters. "But we
went: ‘Wow, that’s interesting, and he’s passionate about it. Let’s
use that.’ "
Sept. 11 has been a touchstone for the series, which is set in a New
York City firehouse. Denis Leary, who plays the lead character, said
Mr. Sunjata’s character creates a rift among the fictional
firefighters. Similar scenes have played out in actual firehouses in
New York, he said, "where some of the younger members don’t even have
to completely buy into the theory of 9/11 being an inside job, but
want to discuss it." BRIAN STELTER
February 06, 2009
Jimmy Carter Supports New 9/11 Probe
http://www.prisonplanet.com/former-president-jimmy-carter-supports-call-for-new-911-investigation.html
Friday, January 30, 2009
Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter has become the latest, and perhaps
most prominent, public figure to express support for a new
investigation into the 9/11 attacks.
We Are Change Ohio attended a book signing by the former President in
Chicago. Despite the best efforts of secret service personnel to
abduct the person recording the conversation, the audio of Carter's
words were still captured.
Carter was asked, "I was just wondering if you'd support the victims
family members that want a new investigation into 9/11". Carter
clarifies the question before responding, "Yeah, I don't have anything
to do with it but I certainly would... it would be nice"
February 05, 2009
BBC Airs Holocaust Smear
I have just sent off a press release protesting about an item on
today's BBC flagship Today programme. A Jewish spokesman brought the
issue of 9/11 scepticism into a discussion on the Holocaust,
suggesting that 9/11 sceptics are Holocaust deniers. At the same time
the beeb refuses any platform to sensible 9/11 sceptics who are not
radical libertarians or Holocaust deniers (yes, they did manage to
find one in our ranks). Any lawyers out there wanting to take up a no
win no fee libel action against them on my behalf? These smears are
particularly annoying as I am just about to get on a plane to Cairo
for the launch of 911 The New Evidence in arabic. The media my book
reach are seem to be Talksport and PressTV, while the national
broadcaster most people here in the UK trust is conniving in smears
and operating de facto censorship. Anyway, here is the text of my
press relase:
January 20, 2009
What did Olmert Have on Bush?
Bush made a humiliating U turn on Gaza. Was he being blackmailed?
It was so bizarre that it might have been dismissed as an internet
rumour if it had not been reported in the Washington Post and other
corporate media. Last week, just before the UN Security Council voted
for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, Israel's PM Olmert (by his account
at least) phoned George Bush, insisting that he leave the podium in
the middle of a speech and told him to change America's vote. The
State Department has issued a semi-denial, but a few hours later
Condoleza Rice did indeed change the US vote from the promised yes to
an abstention, giving Israel the public OK to continue the slaughter
in Gaza. According to many reports they used illegal phosphorus
weapons which set human flesh on fire. According to the Sunday
Telegraph they hit a surprising number of children "accidentally" in
the head.
As respected blogger Professor Juan Cole says, Olmert must have
something on Bush. But what? Bush is a rich man, he's not facing
reelection. He's also a proud and arrogant man: why humiliate himself
publicly?
Could it be that Israel has evidence that 9/11 was allowed to happen,
or (when you consider the near impossibility of anyone, let alone
amateurs, flying large passenger jets in the way they were supposedly
flown on that day) made to happen? Could it be that Bush has been a
victim of blackmail since tasting the forbidden fruit: benefitting
from a crime so ugly that, however indicative the leaks and however
compelling the evidence, no-one in the corporate media would
countenance its possibility.
Of course this can only be speculation at this stage. But one thing we
do know is that 9/11 has never been properly investigated. Another is
that 9/11 provided Washington neocons and Tel Aviv with their biggest
propaganda gift for a long time. It bought the opportunity to invade
Afghanistan and Iraq, two long term neocon goals, and it bought Tel
Aviv another seven years of settlement building in Palestine. Those
with any political nous can deduce that a real investigation into 9/11
would almost certainly turn up a lot more than the brazen lies that
Condoleeza Rice and George Tenet told on oath to the 9/11 Commission.
(Ignored by the corporate media apart from Agence France Presse,
George Tenet denied and then admitted that he had been in multiple
meetings with Bush at his Texas ranch in the weeks before 9/11. One he
"forgot" was with the Chiefs of Staff and lasted all day. Condoleeza
Rice told the Commission, entirely wrongly, that "she could tell them"
there was "nothing" in the CIA's infamous August memo to Bush, still
secret at that time, to say attacks were anticipated in New York. In
fact the memo stressed this possibility.
But the really odd question is this: why do so many people on the
establishment left, the UK's Socialist Workers Party for instance,
Johan Hari in the Independent or George Monbiot in The Guardian,
denounce 9/11 sceptics as some sort of enemy?
They often justify this judgment with the claim that 9/11 is no longer
relevant.
Tell that to the people with the burning flesh in Gaza.
December 17, 2008
Career Army Specialist sues Rumsfeld, Cheney: "official 9/11 story is
false"
April Gallop was nearly killed in the Pentagon attack, allegedly
carried out by amateur pilot Hani Hanjour flying a Boeing 757 at full
speed for hundreds of metres at literally 15 foot above ground level.
Hanjour's expertly steered plane then struck a newly reinforced wing
that was mostly unoccupied, acording to the official 9/11 story.
Gallop, one of the unfortunate people in that part of the building,
does not believe this and she is taking court action to discover the
truth.
This case shows, if nothing else, just how many ways there are for the
truth to emerge. For the coverup to succeed each and every case like
April Gallop's will have to be suppressed (although it is perhaps
instructive to note that many have been). Here are extracts from
internet news service Rawstory.
[]
911 victim April Gallop: Rumsfeld and Cheney conspired to facilitate
9/11 attacks
A career Army specialist who survived the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001,
claims that no evacuation was ordered inside the Pentagon, despite
flight controllers calling in warnings of approaching hijacked
aircraft nearly 20 minutes before the building was struck.
On behalf of Spc. April Gallop... California attorney William Veale
has filed a civil suit against former Secretary of Defense Donald
Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney and former US Air Force General
Richard Myers, who was acting chairman of the joint chiefs on 9/11. It
alleges they engaged in conspiracy to facilitate the terrorist
attacks...
Spc. Gallop also says she heard two loud explosions, and does not
believe that a Boeing 757 hit the building.
"What they don't want is for this to go into discovery," said Gallop's
attorney, Mr. Veale, speaking to RAW STORY. "If we can make it past
their initial motion to dismiss these claims, and we get the power of
subpoena, then we've got a real shot at getting to the bottom of this.
We've got the law on our side."
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/911_survivor_blasts_Rumsfeld_Cheney_No_1217.html
November 10, 2008
Mumbai: murdered police chief had exposed false flag Hindu terror cell
Shock as top Indian Army officer arrested over bomb attack.
No, this was not the 26 November Mumbai attacks, but a sinister and
under reported incident some three weeks earlier. In the words of The
Times:
"The Indian Army has been shocked by the arrest of a senior Military
Intelligence officer on suspicion of involvement in a bomb attack by
Hindu extremists in western India in September.
"Colonel Srikant Prasad Purohit is the first serving officer in
India's Army (seen as a bastion of secularism since the country's
independence in 1947) to be arrested on terrorism charges.
"His detention is prompting calls for a ban on Hindu nationalist
groups accused of stirring political violence, including recent
attacks on Christians in eastern India, before national elections next
year.
"It may also force Indian authorities to investigate whether Hindu
radicals were behind other recent bomb attacks, many of which have
been blamed on Islamic extremists backed by Pakistan's intelligence
service."
In fact other attacks blamed on Muslim extremists were already being
reviewed when this story came out. But the bizarre feature of this
case is that Purohit was arrested by the Mumbai anti-terror squad and
the head of the squad, Hemant Karkare, the man responsible for
fingering Purohit and his military intelligence based gang of false
flag terrorists, was assassinated, ostensibly by Muslim terrorists in
the highly professional Mumbai attacks three weeks later.
Some 9/11 sceptics pointed out a parallel with the FBI's John O'Neil
who died in the 9/11 attacks. O'Neil was forced out of the FBI in the
months before theattacks after a major feud with the US State
Department who he accused of obstructing his investigations into Al
Qaeda. O'Neil died on the first day of his new job helpfully found for
him by friends in New York: head of security at the World Trade
Centre.
Reinvestigate 911 does not jump to conclusions, but clearly there
needs to be an independent investigation into whether the Mumbai
attackers really were from Pakistan and, if they were, who organised
them and whether anyone in India, perhaps an associate of Purohit,
could have helped them find and murder Karkare.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article5107111.ece
http://www.twf.org/News/Y2008/1127-Mumbai.html has a large number of
references, including to the increased co-operation in recent years
between Israel's Mossad and Indian intelligence.
November 06, 2008
Obama wins
I don't want to seem sour, but I have a worrying feeling that the only
good thing about Obama is that he is not Bush or McCain. The best
chance for 9/11 truthers is not that Obama decides to open the files
on 9/11 (as Green candidate Cynthia Mackinney promised), he won't. His
policy positions and appointments so far suggest he is more of a
Washington man than his supporters think.
He might however be distracted enough by current events to allow some
slack to people in Congress like Dennis Kucinich who arre planning
some limited inquiries.
He probably thinks 9/11 sceptics are harmless conspiracy theorists and
does not understand the need to keep everything about 9/11 under
wraps. There are oppoortunities for the 9/11 truth movement because
most of us believe the official story is so precarious that it will
withstand very little proper scrutiny.
October 26, 2008
The Endorsement From Hell
photo
Backing Bush and McCain: But is he even alive?
One oddity of the 9/11 attacks is that the politicians in the US like
George Bush and John McCain who have championed the "war on terror"
enjoy the endorsement of Al Qaeda. Washington writer Ron Suskind
quoted senior CIA analysts as determining that Al Qaeda was pushing
for a Bush victory in 2004. That election was arguably swung by the
notorious "Osama Bin Laden" video a few days before polling, in which
OBL (or an actor) praises US progressives like Michael Moore and
offers them his support.
Now Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times has learned from a CIA
source that a leading password protected Al Qaeda website is saying
they will support Mc Cain in this election.
Many of those who believe the official 9/11 story accept that this
sentiment is privately reciprocated in Washington, pointing out that
within days of the attacks the CIA got an 18 billion dollar budget
increase, along with carte blanche to torture, kill and kidnap.
www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/opinion/26kristof.html
Ron Suskind: The One Percent Doctrine, pub Simon and Shuster
October 04, 2008
Officials from FBI and CIA "ready to speak out"
FBI agents involved in tracking suspected terrorists in the months
before the attacks have always claimed that they were prevented from
investigating suspects later named as 9/11 terrorists. Some 9/11
sceptics say that the number of investigations which were aggressively
blocked by senior FBI managers cannot be explained by overwork and
lost messages as the official narrative insists.
Up to now, however, agents have not alleged that vital information was
deliberately withheld by the CIA. This would be clearly illegal, as
the FBI was the lead agency in counter terrorism (by presidential
directive) and the CIA was in any case forbidden under separate
legislation to intervene within the US.
Now FBI agents Mark Rossini and Douglas Miller, on assignment in
summer 2001 to the "Alec Station", the CIA's top secret Osama bin
Laden unit, are reportedly prepared to describe on camera how the CIA
blocked them from sharing crucial intelligence on two alleged
terrorists with FBI headquarters - and then later threatened them into
lying to Justice Department investigators to cover this up.
This would be powerful new evidence for the view held by many sceptics
that key personnel in the CIA and FBI were protecting ther 9/11 plot
from discovery. Cofer Black, who later championed CIA's post 9/11
strategy of torture and extrajudicial killings, was in overall charge
of the Alec Station team, which was stationed on separate premises and
secret from the rest of the CIA. Black, who cut his teeth working for
the CIA in apartheid South Africa, wrongly told a 2002 Congrssional
Inquiry into 9/11 that the CIA had passed on vital information
"verbally".
In addition, ex CIA Station Chief Robert Baer, an advisor for the 2003
film Syriana, has expressed deep scepticism about aspects of the
attacks in an interview with alternative film makers We Are Change.
Baer discusses the mystery of the white van seized by FBI agents on
the day of the attacks, whose occupants turned out to be Israelis with
links to Isaeli intelligence, and goes on to the issue of whether
anyone in Washington had foreknowledge of 9/11: "I know the guy that
went into his broker in San Diego and said `cash me out, it’s going
down tomorrow.’", says Baer who goes on to say the man's brother
"worked in the White House."
Baer has quoted insiders as saying that 9/11 was not a disaster but
the CIA's "greatest triumph": exactly the view of many 9/11 sceptics.
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/spytalk/2008/10/fbi-prevents-agents-from-telli.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/wearechangela-debriefs-former-cia-case-officer-robert-baer-about-apparent-mossad-and-white-house-911-foreknowledge-and-more.html
September 11, 2008
Rep Dennis Kucinich, Ralph Nader, Cynthia Mackinney all want new 9/11
probe
Dissident Democrat congressman Dennis Kucinich is calling for a South
African style 9/11 Truth Commission.
"Before the Congress adjourns, I will bring forth a new proposal for
the establishment of a National Commission on Truth and
Reconciliation, which will have the power to compel testimony and
gather official documents to reveal to the American people not only
the underlying deception which has divided us, but in that process of
truth seeking set our nation on a path of reconciliation."
His statement cited the false links between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein's
Iraq and did not openly challenge the official 9/11 "facts". However
Kucinich has expressed strong scepticism over the 9/11 attacks on
previous occasions, so it would appear the omission had more to do
with meeting the editorial line of establishment media on the centre
left like The Nation and the Huffington Post which have mostly given
unqualified endorsement to the official 9/11 story.
Most US 9/11 sceptics nonetheless welcomed Kucinich's the call,
arguing that a commission with full subpoena power would soon get to
the facts.
The call for a new 9/11 enquiry was endorsed by Green candidate
Cynthia Mackinney who promised that as President she would open all
the files on 9/11. In addition, veteran populist Ralph Nader described
the 9/11 Commission as "flawed, right from the get go... can you
imagine an attack like that and the government didn't even want to
have an inquiry?" he asked, referring to the two year's of campaigning
by victim families which eventually led to the 9/11 Commission.
For Kucinich's full statement see
www.commondreams.org/newswire/2008/0910-7
For Nader see
http://www.prisonplanet.com/nader-calls-for-new-911-investigation.html
September 11, 2008
Russian TV screens documentary sceptical of Washington's 9/11 story
ZERO, a documentary made by eminent Italian journalist and euro MP
Giulietto Chiesa but largely suppressed by corporate media in western
Europe, has been screened on prime time Russian TV. The documentary
argues that the official story cannot be true.
It has long been the view of many 9/11 sceptics that, as ex-President
of Italy Francesco Cossiga stated recently, every intelligence service
in the world knows this. Some have speculated that the Russian
screening of Zero was a warning shot to US and its allies not to
restart a cold war with Russia, as appeared to be happening after the
brief August war in Georgia. There are unconfirmed reports that Russia
has satellite pictures taken on the day of the attacks that would
prove the official story is not true. Many 911 sceptics say an amateur
pilot could not have flown a large Boeing 757 passenger jet at high
speed at ground level to hit the Pentagon, as the official account
insists.
For more news about Zero, and its screening in Berlin
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3626100,00.html
Less than half the planet blames Al Qaeda for 9/11 attacks.
The poll was conducted by the Project on International Policy
Attitudes. It interviewed 16,000 people in 17 countries, far larger
than the normal sample for an opinion poll, and included people in the
US, UK and other allied countries. They were asked who they thought
was behind the 9/11 attacks. Many, for instance 25% in Germany,
thought the US government was the culprit. Despite the neutral tone of
the question, the result understates the strength of the sceptic
position because many sceptics believe that although the attacks were
probably the work of Al Qaeda, they must have been helped to succeed
by the deliberate inaction of US authorities. Others believe Al Qaeda
indeed organised the attacks, but is controlled by the CIA.
Other polls have found that over 75% of US citizens believe they have
been not been told the full story of the 9/11 attacks, while one in
three believe it is likely that the US government deliberately helped
the attacks to succeed.
Reference:
http://www.alternet.org/audits/98454/less_than_half_the_world_believes_al_qaeda_was_behind_9_11_attacks/
September 09, 2008
New York 9/11 ballot initiative achieves goal.
Cynics say that the true story of the 9/11 attacks will never be
known, but they could be underestimating the tenacity of New Yorkers,
30,000 of whom have signed a petition calling for a new independent
investigation of the events that the corporate media say were entirely
the work of 19 fanatical hijackers. Here is a report from New York:
http://www.nyc911initiative.org/
Thanks to all the hard-working petitioners who have spent months on
this historic effort, we have now gathered over 30,000 signatures of
NYC registered voters!
This is the minimum requirement to submit a ballot initiative to NY
City Council. Now the foundation has been established. From here we
will build and create a winning campaign that will result in placing
the Initiative for a new, independent, comprehensive 9/11
investigation on the ballot in 2009.
Now there is a grassroots action which is designed to obtain an
honest, independent investigation of 9/11 by placing an initiative on
the New York City ballot. Although we hoped to be ready for the Nov.
4th, 2008 general election, we would have needed at least 2-4 weeks
longer in order to submit everything to New York City Council. So now
we will aim for the mayoral election of 2009. Our core team of 25+
volunteers actually feel positive about this. We prefer to increase
our numbers to a much higher level which will make an undeniable case
for passage. Therefore, we will continue to gather petition signatures
into the next year with the goal of reaching 100,000 signatures and
establish a powerful mandate showing the voters of New York City are
calling for the creation of a new Commission that will conduct an
authentic and comprehensive investigation of 9/11.
If you're not a resident, you can direct all your friends and family
in New York City to this site and urge them to sign our petition and
volunteer. Also, you can also donate to the cause. You will be
contributing to the momentum we are creating to call for an impartial,
independent investigation of the most consequential event of our time.
September 06, 2008
Canadian Professor: we need an International Tribunal on 9/11
Anthony J. Hall, Founding Coordinator of Globalization Studies
University of Lethbridge, Nova Scotia, has eloquently made the case
for an International Tribunal to try to discover the whole story
behind the 9/11 attacks.
Here are some extracts from his paper:
We must empower a credible international tribunal of esteemed jurists
with sufficient independence to asses on its own merits the growing
body of evidence to indicate that the destruction of the Twin Towers
and World Trade Centre 7, together with the hit on the Pentagon, were
caused by something considerably more elaborate than the actions of
nineteen young Saudis equipped with nothing but box cutters, flight
training and jihadist zeal...
Too much state terror and too much state criminality has occurred
since 911 not to revisit the scene of the crime that created the
springboard for such systemic and unrelenting abuses of authority and
sacred trusts vested in our governments. Was the whole 911 operation
really planned and instigated by a band of Islamic extremists acting
alone?
Was the whole undertaking really planned and coordinated in distant
Eurasian caves, ones conveniently located on planned pipeline routes
meant to tap the last large reserves of unexploited Middle Eastern
oil? Was the role of Wall Street in the events of 911 confined to that
of victim? Wouldn't any truly independent inquiry into what actually
transpired on 911 begin by addressing such fundamental questions and
then work from there?
http://www.edmonton911.org/mission.html
September 01, 2008
Flight 93 cellphone mystery
9/11 sceptics have from always been suspicious of the part of the
official 9/11 story which claims that cellphone calls were made from
hijacked planes. Initially suspicion was based on the extreme
difficulty of making mobile calls from planes flying at normal
altitude. Much later FBI records were released which confirmed the
sceptic view: nearly all the alleged cell phone calls were made by in
flight phones, the FBI now concedes. But this creates another problem:
why were the calls so snatched and frequently cut short? Because, say
many sceptics, the calls were faked, using voice cloning technology.
To hide the fact that the caller was an impostor the calls were made
to look like mobile calls, cut short when the recipient might become
suspicious. One call had the caller introducing himself to his mother
by his surname and then asking if she believed him before being
apparently cut off.
Now 9/11 author Rowland Morgan has discovered that according to the
FBI the mobile phone belonging to presumed 9/11 hero Todd Beamer was
used for multiple calls AFTER flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania.
According to the official story the phone should have been buried with
the plane wreckage. Morgan concludes
"The long series of one-minute calls to Woodbridge NJ after the 9/11
events, starting at 11:07 and ending at 20:58 is perplexing. The
intervals range from 1:38 hours to 0:02 minutes and show no pattern
that I can distinguish...
Woodbridge, a small town not far from the Fresh Kills crime-scene
where all the WTC debris was collected... The only connection I could
find was a management recruiting company that works for Oracle, which
was Todd and Lisa Beamer's workplace...
I think this is contributory evidence that Todd Beamer was not aboard
Flight 93 - at least, not with his cell-phone about his person."
(Source: private correspondence based on FBI court testimony.
Journalists and researchers wishing to follow up this lead should
contact reinvestigate 911)
"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci
ebe
You might wish to watch the movie "A Day in September" produced in
2003. It is a French film with dialogue in English. The basis of the
film is about a person who vows to help a colleagues children in lieu
of the events of September 11th, 2001. The colleague was a special
consultant for various governments and clients. I thought this film
was thought provoking and explained a few things. I know it is a work
of fiction, but there are some elements that seem very believable.
Let me know what you think.
Ebe