July 16, 2009
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
(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."
See also press release re. DRG's tour on www.london911truth.org.uk
London activist meeting this Monday
The monthly London 9/11 truth activists' informal social/business meeting will be held as normal on the first Monday of each month at the Counting House Pub, Cornhill EC1. These meetings are independent of Reinvestigate911 and are open to all activists. It is a large pub with several rooms, if it is not clear where to go ask for the room booked by Annie Machon.
"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).
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."
email us
Go on our mailing list to receive emails no more than once a week. Either send a blank email to
reinvestigate911-l-subscribe@gn.apc.org
or click here to send a blank email through your default email package
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
![[]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_uHnyabOo2AFgqGwFC9WwJADUWOItrgEGanMG6XDCSrwaJxQ5chUbBKAUPx36yFxzOB-y2xafT6b8k5_5hcfq9lXXbgSsbD7Qnx3EmAS6ia8pLzK7DEqNnB3JuRGH0p_FpoAJUY7Q=s0-d)
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 18, 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).
The review is copied below.
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.
Claims that Al Qaeda 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 21, 2009
BBC at Work Again?
Someone (Youtube? the BBC?) has decided to exercise censorship, big time. Youtube has closed OneDeadDJ a high profile 9/11 sceptic account with no explanation. Probably the most famous video OneDeadDJ posted was footage of the BBC announcing the collapse of WTC Building 7 some 20 minutes before the event (you can see the building standing in the background as the announcer speaks). This comical and sinister moment has been enjoyed in over a million Youtube hits and drawn 45,000 comments. As Youtube won't explain why they censored the footage we can speculate that the BBC, in the interestes of balance (ho ho), reminded Youtube of their copyright. But why close the whole account? And what about all the other pieces of BBC copyright footage all over Youtube?
Funnily enough, when I tried to search Google for the story it came up with several references - but not one that led to the original story on the radical Infowars website which first broke it. Here is a link to the video story when it first broke.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/260207building7.htm
The official line, by the way, is that officials realised it was going to collapse and BBC and CNN both got the wrong message. But how did officials know this? The recent NIST report into the collapse, trumpeted by the BBC as explaining everything, found that the collapse was essentially caused by a freak event. There is still no real explanation for the rapid and symmetrical nature of the collapse of all three buildings.
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?
9/11 sceptics think they might know. They point out the following awkward facts. Bush did his best to prevent any investigation into the 9/11 attacks. When the 9/11 Commission finally met Bush made it a condition he would give evidence only off the record and only accompanied by his mentor Cheney (in case he gave anything away, they suspect). We know (from the FBI) that the anthrax attacks which paralysed Washington in the weeks after 9/11 came from a US military source and purported to be from Islamic terrorists (a part of the 9/11 plot which unravelled, some allege). We know too (from Washington's official investigations) that the CIA and their allies in the upper echelons of the FBI aggressively blocked FBI field officers who were hot on the trail of the apparent 9/11 hijackers (possible motive: to make sure a plan hatched by the CIA's unique and then ultra top secret Osama bin Laden unit was not thwarted). We know from leaks from FBI officers that Israelis working for a dodgy Mossad-linked company were arrested after they were reported celebrating and filming the collapse of the twin towers. Although at least one failed a lie detector, they were released nonetheless on the orders of the Bush White House.
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: committing 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.
![[]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_vjtS_3tsl3N2ksPTp0uG4p5Y_KVhCWN1RShSt-sSjpagAMSCDSnHNVpMsSWof0x9mt8IcOEYcgYnViOSXQDaij-cOqSWuZg7GYmfwZOtaAzfxVl9Y=s0-d)
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
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
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:
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?
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)
No comments:
Post a Comment