Fujita says potential move afoot to have global body probe suspicions surrounding terror attacks
Japanese member of Parliament Yukihisa Fujita told the Alex Jones Show yesterday that a potential new investigation of the 9/11 cover-up could be led by global parliamentarians he has been in contact with, or even by the United Nations itself.
Fujita, an MP for the Japanese Democratic Party, and a member of the House of Councillors in the Diet (national legislature), presented evidence which contradicted the official 9/11 story during a widely publicized Japanese Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee meeting in January of this year.
Following Fujita’s presentation in the Japanese Diet, he also took part in a 9/11 truth conference at the EU Parliament in Brussels on February 26th which was hosted by Italian MEP Giullietto Chiesa (both presentations can be viewed at the end of this article).
"This is something Parliamentarians of various countries could ask - I was in Europe meeting with European MP’s and they are also thinking about asking the UN to investigate, so these kind of efforts need to be done internationally," said Fujita, adding that he had visited eleven different European countries in an attempt to garner support for the move.
Actress Cho says Americans will be angry when they realize true agenda behind the attacks.
Top comedian and actress Margaret Cho has joined Willie Nelson and Charlie Sheen in questioning the official 9/11 story, stating that the public were going to become very angry when they realized there was a conspiracy behind the terror attacks.
Appearing on the nationally syndicated Alex Jones Show, Cho said her doubts about 9/11 were sparked by President Bush’s non-reaction to the unfolding crisis.
"I got concerned right after 9/11 where the plane had hit the World Trade Center and he was in that classroom with all those children and they told him what was going on and he did nothing," said Cho.
"We were attacked for the first time on American soil and he did nothing - that’s when I realized there was something very very wrong," she added.
Cho questioned the official story of what happened at the Pentagon, asking why so much footage of the twin towers being attacked was available in comparison with not even a clear picture of what occurred at the Pentagon - a far more sensitive and symbolic target.
"Why are they not focusing on that? What are they hiding?" asked Cho, "Of course it’s going to be monitored from every angle at every second and yet we have no footage of it - it’s very mysterious."
Cho said that there was usually a conspiracy behind every major event in American history and that when the conspiracy behind 9/11 was fully uncovered, people were going to be very angry.
The actress said that many of her Arab-American friends doubted the organizational skills of Al-Qaeda in being able to pull off the terror attacks and questioned the plausibility of the passengers on the plane not fighting back against the hijackers.
Larry A. Silverstein, who has won nearly $4.6 billion in insurance payments to cover his losses and help him rebuild at the World Trade Center site, is seeking $12.3 billion in damages from airlines and airport security companies for the 9/11 attack.
Mr. Silverstein, the developer of ground zero, sought the damages, whose amount was not previously known, in a claim filed in 2004, that says the airlines and airport security companies failed to prevent terrorists from hijacking the planes used to destroy the buildings.
His case was consolidated last week with similar, earlier lawsuits brought by families of some victims of the attack and by other property owners. But in seeking $12.3 billion, he is by far the biggest claimant in the litigation.
The size of Mr. Silverstein’s claim was revealed last week at a status conference on the litigation in United States District Court in Manhattan.
The claims by the parties involved total about $23 billion, and Mr. Silverstein’s claim for such a large chunk could jeopardize claims from other businesses and property owners, according to defense lawyers. A lawyer for the victims’ families, Donald Migliori, said he was confident that their claims would not be affected because they would take priority over the property claims.
A lawyer for the airlines, Desmond Barry, said that if Mr. Silverstein won his claim, he could push the total claims beyond the amount of insurance that the airlines and security companies have available. "There ain’t that much insurance," Mr. Barry said.
The federal government has capped the liability at the amount of available insurance, to avoid bankrupting the airlines. The exact amount of insurance available is still being explored in the court proceedings.
Richard A. Williamson, a lawyer for Mr. Silverstein, said at the court conference on March 18 that Mr. Silverstein was seeking damages to compensate him for continuing losses at the site. Mr. Silverstein, through his company, World Trade Center Properties, has a 99-year lease, worth $3.2 billion, on four buildings at the site, including the fallen twin towers. He signed the lease in July 2001, just six weeks before the attack.
Since the attack, Mr. Silverstein has been paying rent to the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey on towers that no longer exist, his lawyer told the judge, Alvin K. Hellerstein. Mr. Williamson said that his client had also lost rental income from about 400 tenants.
Dara McQuillan, a spokesman for Mr. Silverstein, said that the $12.3 billion represented $8.4 billion for the replacement value of the destroyed buildings and $3.9 billion in other costs, including $100 million a year in rent to the Port Authority and $300 million a year in lost rental income, as well as the cost of marketing and leasing the new buildings.
Mr. Barry, speaking for the airlines, contended that Mr. Silverstein had been more than compensated by the nearly $4.6 billion insurance settlement, reached after almost six years of litigation. He argued that Mr. Silverstein was entitled to the market value of the property, which he said had been established by the $3.2 billion lease.
Judge Hellerstein expressed skepticism about Mr. Silverstein’s claim, and asked why he had not stemmed his losses by just "walking away."
Turning to Mr. Williamson, Judge Hellerstein asked: "What’s the nature of your recovery?"
To which Mr. Williamson replied, "For damages suffered by the events of 9/11, not value. Damages."
Mr. Williamson said that the lease required Mr. Silverstein to rebuild and to continue paying rent.
"And so I’m putting to you if you walked away from the lease, you would lose the value of the lease," Judge Hellerstein said. "Would you have a further obligation to pay money?"
Mr. Williamson replied, "You have to examine that question. "But to me that’s not the test of what are our damages."
Judge Hellerstein pressed Mr. Williamson to put a dollar figure on the damages. "I don’t think it’s necessary to know the precise amount," the judge said. "I think some order of magnitude would be appropriate."
When Mr. Williamson balked, Mr. Barry jumped in.
"I think their claim is $12.3 billion," he said.
"Plus prejudgement interest," Mr. Williamson confirmed.
To which the judge tartly replied, "We shouldn’t forget that."
Judge Hellerstein ordered Mr. Silverstein to provide more documentation of his claim, or risk losing it.
Mr. McQuillan, the spokesman for Mr. Silverstein, said on Wednesday the developer felt both an obligation under his lease and a moral obligation to rebuild, rather than walk away. He said that the insurance companies who paid him would be repaid if he prevails.
Plaintiffs also revealed that after a spate of settlements, there are seven wrongful death cases and two injury cases remaining, out of more than 90 filed.
Those who sued represent just a small fraction of the casualties on Sept. 11. Most of the victims of the attack and their families chose to take the compensation offered through a federal fund, forgoing their right to sue.
Mr. Migliori, the lawyer for victims’ survivors, said he believed that the claimants with property-damage claims — including Mr. Silverstein and some insurance companies trying to recoup their payments — would allow the death and injury cases to get priority in payment of damages.
The judge declined to set any trial date in the case, saying that it would be "fictitious," but set a fact-finding deadline at the end of this year. Any trials in the case appear to be more than a year away.
Ron Paul was a guest on Coast To Coast AM with George Noory from 1 - 2 AM on March 25, 2008. During questions a disingenuous Neocon named Joe called in to ask Ron Paul about his supporters believing in "conspiracy theories". This was similar to what CNN did during the debates.
Ron Paul answered and said while he did not believe the Government did 9/11 he was not satisfied with the investigation and would like a new investigation into 9/11.
We’ve all seen it on television. The defense attorney argues his client was "entrapped". That is, that it wasn’t the defendant’s idea to commit the crime, but that the police planted the idea and urged him to do it.
Many of us have heard allegations that post-9/11 arrests of suspected Al Qaeda members were based on very thin information. Did you realize that all or virtually all of these arrests occurred due to entrapment? For example:
The Washington Post ran a story about one alleged threat entitled "Was it a terror sting or entrapment?", showing that the U.S. government lent material support to the wanna-be terrorists, and put violent ideas in their heads
There are numerous other instances of entrapment of peaceful or mentally incompetent people who are then arrested as "terrorists" (see this, this and this)
But surely 9/11 was different, right?. Without doubt, the hijackers were bloodthirsty militant Muslims who, solely due to their crazy beliefs and dark hearts, decided to attack and kill Americans. Right?
Maybe. But let’s take a look at the facts before deciding:
The former president of Italy said that U.S. and Israeli intelligence services were behind the 9/11 attack, and that that fact is widely known by the intelligence services of all of the western nations
According to intelligence officials in India, Pakistan’s military chief of intelligence wired $100,000 to the lead hijacker days before 9/11 (mentioned here in a news roundup). This is especially interesting because: That particular chief of intelligence was appointed to that position with the approval of the U.S., and the intelligence chief had held "consultations" with his U.S. counterparts at the CIA and the Pentagon during the week prior to September 11
Given the above-described information, and the government’s history of entrapping peaceful or mentally incompetent people and placing violent ideas in their heads - and plans and resources in their hands - is it possible that any of the participants in the 9/11 attacks who were not government agents were entrapped by those who were?
Note: I am not arguing that the hijackers’ names should be cleared or that they are good people who were victimized. Anyone who took a single life on 9/11 is a murderer and a scoundrel. I am, instead, simply asking who the true masterminds of 9/11 were, and who provided the resources to carry out the plan.
Many citizens react to their rulers like little kids who recognize that a stranger is acting suspiciously and may be up to no good – but then decide whether to trust the man depending on the type of candy he pulls from his pockets. It is as if a Reese’s Peanut Butter Cup trumps the beady eyes, sweaty forehead, and out-of-season trench coat. Likewise, adults may be wary about a politician – but if the guy promises free prescription drugs or protection and safety, many take the bait.
The naïve response to politicians triumphed in the weeks after the 9/11 attacks. By the end of September 2001, almost two-thirds of Americans said they "trust the government in Washington to do what is right" either "just about always" or "most of the time." Amazingly, the attacks even boosted Americans’ confidence that government would protect them against terrorists.
Many of the most respected and prominent media commentators saw 9/11 as the great sanctifier of government power. The New York Times’s R.W. Apple announced, "Government is back in style." Wall Street Journal columnist Al Hunt proclaimed, "It’s time to declare a moratorium on government-bashing." Los Angeles Times columnist Ronald Brownstein declared on September 19, "At the moment the first fireball seared the crystalline Manhattan sky last week, the entire impulse to distrust government that has become so central to U.S. politics seemed instantly anachronistic." Harvard University political scientist Robert Putnam effused,
I think there is the potential that September 11 will turn out to be a turning point for civic America.... There could be some good coming from it if it causes us to become ... more open-minded about the role of government.
The 9/11 attacks produced many such summonses to elevate and glorify government. Yet it was U.S. government foreign policies that stirred up the hornets’ nest, breeding hatred that led to the attacks themselves. After two skyscrapers collapse and the Pentagon is in flames, the government is hailed for failing to protect Americans from the enemies its policies helped create. The 9/11 attackers were mass murderers who had no right to kill Americans. But to pretend that the attacks originated out of nowhere or out of hatred for freedom fraudulently exonerates the U.S. government.
The Bush administration did all it could to exploit 9/11 to promote presidential and governmental greatness. However, a 2002 Senate Intelligence Committee investigation found a vast array of federal-intelligence and law-enforcement failures prior to the attack. Because the Bush administration often stonewalled the Senate investigation, 9/11 widows and widowers pressured Congress to create an independent commission to investigate the attacks. Bush and Republican and Democratic congressional leaders stacked the commission with former congressmen, high-ranking government officials, and others entwined in the Washington establishment. Beverly Eckert, a 9/11 widow and activist, complained, "We wanted journalists, we wanted academics.... We did not want politicians."
Philip Zelikow was appointed executive director of the commission. Zelikow, the co-editor of a Harvard study entitled Why People Don’t Trust Government, had worked closely with National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice and had co-authored a book with her in 1999. He had also been in charge of the Bush White House transition team on national security matters, had been involved in numerous transition briefings on the subject of terrorism, and was called as a witness before the commission. He recused himself from the commission hearing at which Rice testified. She was the one government official who perhaps most deserved perjury charges from her testimony, yet there was not a single word of criticism of her in the commission’s final report.
The 9/11 report
The 9/11 Commission became the Bush administration’s most famous faith-based initiative. The commission appeared far more concerned with restoring trust than in revealing truth. Bush and Cheney were allowed to testify without a transcript and not under oath. Americans never heard what they said. Instead, the commission offered a synopsis of their comments – as if it would have been impious to quote them directly. The White House was allowed to edit the final version of the commission’s report before it was publicly released.
The commission’s final 568-page report quickly became a bestseller, widely praised in part because it assiduously avoided judgment. There was no mention in the final report of how Bush and Cheney exploited falsehoods about 9/11 to lead the nation to war against Iraq. But, as Amherst professor Benjamin DeMott noted in Harper’s, the report was useless to historians because of a "seeming terror of bias." He was especially appalled that the commission accepted without challenge Bush’s assertion that the August 6, 2001, President’s Daily Brief was "historical in nature." DeMott observed, "There’s little mystery about why the Commission is tongue-tied. It can’t call a liar a liar." He noted,
The ideal readers of The 9/11 Commission Report are those who resemble the Commission itself in believing that a strong inclination to trust the word of highly placed others is evidence of personal moral distinction.
The 9/11 Commission report provided a litany of government missteps while carefully avoiding raising any ire against the government. The failures often appeared to be more acts of God than failings by specific identifiable individuals. It strived for a balance of criticism between the current and prior administrations and between the two political parties. Thus, there was nothing to be done except count our blessings, celebrate our two-party system, and go whip the terrorists.
The 9/11 Commission also compiled ample evidence of government lying. Yet the commission effectively ignored or "rose above" all the falsehoods. There was no sense that the lies of the most powerful officials in the land posed any threat to America. Instead, there were "communication problems" between government agencies.
The mainstream press
The establishment aided the government by heaping derision on nonbelievers. The Washington Post, in an October 2004 article headlined "Conspiracy Theories Flourish on the Internet," examined the problems of those who had not accepted the government’s latest version of 9/11. The Post noted sympathetically,
The ready and growing audience for conspiracy theories about the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks has been particularly galling to those who worked on ... the bipartisan panel known as the 9/11 commission.
In Washington, "bipartisan" is the ultimate test of credibility – as if there is no chance that the two parties would ever conspire against the truth. Zelikow bemoaned,
We discussed the theories. When we wrote the report, we were also careful not to answer all the theories. It’s like playing Whack-A-Mole. You’re never going to whack them all. They satisfy a deep need in the people who create them. The Post turned to a Syracuse University political scientist, Michael Barkun, for psychological insights into nonbelievers:
Conspiracy theories are ... usually wrong, but they’re psychologically reassuring. Because what they say is that everything is connected, nothing happens by accident, and that there is some kind of order in the world, even if it’s produced by evil forces.
The Post never ran any articles on the psychological maladies of people who insisted on believing the government’s statements on 9/11 despite the contradictions or who insisted on clinging to earlier government claims after the government revised the facts.
Zelikow, who was hired by Rice as her top counsel at the State Department a few months after the Post article appeared, commented,
The hardcore conspiracy theorists are totally committed.... That’s not our worry. Our worry is when things become infectious, as happened with the [John F. Kennedy] assassination. Then this stuff can be deeply corrosive to public understanding. You can get where the bacteria can sicken the larger body. (If the government was so forthright in its investigation of the Kennedy assassination, why were the Warren Commission records sealed for 75 years?)
Not a single one of the top 300 American newspapers or magazines archived on the LexisNexis database commented on Zelikow’s "bacteria" and "infectious" characterization of disbelief in the government’s version of 9/11. Yet his comment sounded as if the 9/11 Commission saw itself as America’s mental-health czar. Private doubts are the bacteria, and government assertions are presumably the disinfectant. As long as people believe what the government says, no one will get sick.
Some of the allegations regarding 9/11 – such as the charge that no plane had hit the Pentagon – were easily verifiable as false. New American, the magazine of the John Birch Society, ran an article harshly criticizing some of the 9/11 conspiracy theories, though carefully avoiding embracing the government. Yet, as with Waco, the Establishment invoked outlying loons in order to seek to undermine the credibility of all criticism of the government. But the existence of conspiracy nuts does not make the government honest.
The Washington Post never portrayed government officials who put out false statements about 9/11 in the same light as it did the private conspiracy buffs. Despite the fact that private citizens have no power over other Americans and that they have no authority to coerce them or drag them into an unnecessary war, their false statements are presented as a greater threat than those of government officials. The obsession with private lies is misplaced, when the real danger is the government lie – a lie embraced and disseminated by a subservient media, vested with all the prestige and aura of the state, and protected by an iron curtain of government secrecy. And regardless of how many times the government changes the official story, people who continue to distrust the government are delirious.
The government’s appearing to be a necessary evil does not oblige people to trust it. We face a choice of trusting government or trusting freedom – trusting overlords who have lied and abused their power or trusting individuals to make the most of their own lives.
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth experts demand questions
Richard Gage AIA, the founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and hundreds of other industry experts’ call for a new investigation into the collapse of the WTC twin towers and Building 7 is gaining strength following revelations of falsification and cover-up in relation to the FEMA-funded inquiry into the destruction of the buildings on 9/11.
As we reported earlier, the American Society of Civil Engineers - an organization that was funded by FEMA to investigate the collapse of the twin towers on 9/11 - has been accused of engaging in a cover-up to protect the government, with critics charging the organization falsified conclusions that skyscrapers could not withstand getting hit by airplanes.
As Gage highlights during the interview, numerous prominent architects and other industry experts have called for a new investigation into the collapse of the twin towers and WTC 7.
These include James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), who last year said that "the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable."
"Let’s look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what’s the significance of one cause versus another," he added.
Charles Pegelow, BS CE – Civil Engineer with more than 25 years experience in structural design and analysis and project management of construction of major projects, including large steel structures, also added his support to a new inquiry. Pegelow stated that the "FEMA / Kean Commission Report was a flawed investigation and it needs to be reopened."
Joel S. Hirschhorn, former full professor Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison; senior official at the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment; Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources at the National Governors Assoc., has also called for a new investigation to bring out the truth behind 9/11.
The Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth website lists scores of other experts who have added their voice to the call for a fresh inquiry and Gage lists their credentials during the video interview.
Today’s fresh controversy, allied to last month’s revelations about 9/11 Commission executive director Philip Zelikow’s ties to the White House and his efforts to shield the Bush administration from responsibility for the terror attack, only lend new weight to calls for an independent inquiry - complete with subpoena powers - into the terror attacks.
Elsewhere in terrorism finance, an address book recovered in a raid linked an al-Qaeda operative to a Saudi billionaire, the IIRO and the Muslim World League are part of the Saudi government according to testimony, and Persian Gulf sheikhs allegedly gave bin Laden US$ 50 million in a handy single transfer in 1999. The government of Saudi Arabia refused to help capture a key Hezboallah figure in 1996, made little effort to fight terrorism financing before 2002, and was still not properly overseeing charities in 2007. In addition, militant operatives were told to use a prominent Saudi bank and a known terrorism financier was removed from UN and US blacklists when he promised not to do it anymore.
We Are Change activists spoke with Fox News reporter Carl Cameron after holding signs behind one of his broadcasts (to insist on the coverage mainstream media won’t give).
Although Cameron maintained that he was an empty vessel unable to influence any coverage of 9/11 truth, he seemed sympathetic and held a long dialogue about the under-reported and often mischaracterized ’ 9/11 truth movement’.
Cameron posed– at least off camera– as true investigative reporter, curious and considerate of evidence pointing towards cover-up and crime.
Nevertheless, he dashed hopes of Fox reporting any real news. "What do you want me to say?… It’s not anything I’m remotely involved in. I cover presidential politics."
Japanese MP Yukihisa Fujita of the Democratic Party of Japan, a member of the House of Councillors in the Diet of Japan is the single most important person to step forward to ask hard questions about 9/11 and the "War on Terror" this year.
Among the many topics he covered, he called upon the 9/11 Truth movement to extend their presence beyond the Internet to the masses. He recommended the showing of films in public concerning 9/11 so as to create an awareness concerning the realities of September 11, 2001.
A review of "9/11 Contradictions: An Open Letter to Congress and the Press," by Dr. David Ray Griffin. Interlink Publishing, March 2008. 368 p. List
At last there is a book about 9/11 that politicians and journalists can openly discuss without fear of being labeled "conspiracy theorists".
9/11 Contradictions advances no theories. It simply exposes 25 astonishing internal contradictions that will haunt the public story of this unparalleled event for all time.
Until now, the persistent and disturbing questions about the day that changed the world have confused and alienated journalists and politicians, because:
1) The technical issues regarding the collapse of the towers, the failure of the military to intercept the flights, and the relatively minor damage to the have been considered too complex for analysis in the media.
However, Griffin’s new book requires no technical expertise from the reader, because each readable chapter revolves around one simple internal contradiction inherent in the public story. "If Jones says ’P’ and Smith says ’Not P’, we can all recognize that something must be wrong, because both statements cannot be true."
2) Many who have doubted the official story have offered alternative theories which have been dismissed as "conspiracy theories" by a press which must understandably place a high value on its credibility.
However, this book offers no alternative theories to explain the contradictions within the public story. It simply presents the glaring contradictions that have never been probed by Congress or the media, and beseeches members of these institutions come to grips with the reality and lead the charge for a truly independent investigation.
3) The 9/11 issue is six years old, journalists are busy people, and the world has moved on.
Though six years have passed, this matter is by no means closed, nor is the trail cold. "The accepted story about 9/11 has been used to increase military spending, justify wars, restrict civil liberties, and exalt the executive branch of the government." Indeed, this reviewer notes, the public story has recently been challenged in foreign forums (Japan Parliament, January 10, 2008, and at the European Parliament building in Brussels, February 26, 2008). The 9/11 Commissioners themselves have cast doubt on the credibility of the Commission Report in their January 2, 2008 New York Times article, "Stonewalled by the CIA." (Ref. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/opinion/02kean.html)
Let us now turn to the contradictions. But first, to quote Professor Griffin:
"Within the philosophy of science, there are two basic criteria for discriminating between good and bad theories. First, a theory should not be inconsistent with any of the relevant facts....Second, it must be self-consistent, devoid of any internal contradictions. If a theory contains an internal contradiction, it is an unacceptable theory."
Unacceptable, for example, is the following internal contradiction, quoted from the chapter summaries that have been helpfully provided at the end of the book interested investigative journalists and members of Congress:
With regard to the identity of the plane spotted over the White House around the time of the Pentagon strike: The military’s denial that it was a military plane is contradicted by CNN footage of the plane’s flight, which showed, as former military officers have agreed, that it was an Air Force E-4B.
[Reviewer’s note: "The E-4B serves as the National Airborne Operations Center for the president, secretary of defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff or JCS." Cited from a current US Air Force factsheet at http://www.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=99.]
In his 2004 "The New Pearl Harbor", Griffin had already noted that the Standard Operating Procedures regarding flight interceptions had been inexplicably dropped on September 11th. This reviewer deduces that because a complex network of defense systems could not have been fully disabled without coordination from a senior military level, it was logical for Dr. Griffin to open the current volume by asking questions that the 9/11 Commission failed to ask: what were President Bush, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, and General Richard B. Myers, Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, doing that morning? In each case, inexplicable contradictions emerged in the reports of their whereabouts, and the same applied to Vice President Dick Cheney. None of these public officials were questioned under oath, and now it is abundantly clear that the contradictions surrounding them must be laid to rest in by a thorough and rigorous investigation.
In Part II, Griffin carefully tracks the disparities in the reported times at which the military was notified about the erratic behaviors of Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93. In each case, the striking contradictions he unearths are shown to require a serious investigation into how this over-arching failure actually did happen, and---this reviewer suggests---what connection it may have had to the unprecedented military air drills that were progressing throughout the attacks.
In Part III, probing questions regarding the pre-9/11 tastes and habits of the alleged hijackers are closely pursued through early press reports, with the confounding revelation that they had taken up Western sexual and drinking practices, and could certainly not be characterized as devout Muslims ready to meet their maker. The contradictions revealed in the investigation of cell phone and airphone reports of their actions on the planes is nothing short of brilliant, negating the entire phenomenon of the aggregate onboard myth.
Finally, Part IV deals with the towers themselves, including advance knowledge of their collapses, and the extraordinary oral testimonies of dozens of firefighters who reported, for example, massive explosions in the sub-basements of the buildings: a 50-ton hydraulic press reduced to rubble; a 300-lb. steel door wrinkled up like a strip of aluminum foil.
It is interesting to note that Dr. Griffin has become a virtual one-man clearinghouse for the vast accumulation of research that has been done on this world-changing event. It now appears highly likely that his neutral approach to this impressive body of evidence will be the axe that finally splits the issue open. Each one of the 25 carefully researched contradictions represents a crumbling brick in the official facade that shields the world from the unknown underlying truth.
As a writer myself, and a retired professional librarian, it was an honour to critique and give bibliographic support for Dr. Griffin’s chapters, and for the extensive research supplied in the footnotes. Throughout the process, I was able to witness first-hand the precise, methodical, and ethical standards to which he works. One can only hope that the exceptional quality and responsibility evident in his work will inspire people in Congress and the media (and indeed in all walks of life) to rise to his challenge to investigate this pivotal international issue.
Former debunker Dietl admits he shares 9/11 truth activist’s questions during confrontation
Highly decorated former New York City detective Bo Dietl admits that his first instinct on 9/11 was that the twin towers were downed with explosives, as he conceded that he shared many questions about the official story with 9/11 truth activists he had formerly debunked on national television.
What started out as a adversarial confrontation with members of We Are Change turned into a cordial discussion as Dietl contradicted some of his previous public statements on 9/11 and appeared to agree with the group on several issues, presumably prompted by the fact that his daughter was doing a research paper on 9/11 which lent credence to the suspect nature of the official story behind the attacks.
"I had a perfect view....next thing is I hear screaming, I looked up and when these are coming down you know what the first thing I said is? They had fucking bombs in those buildings - I’m telling you what was in my mind, I said there had to be bombs in the buildings," said Dietl.
"You’re talking about two 110 story buildings that fucking evaporated," said Dietl, adding, "Where are the people....I ask the same questions it’s such a devastating thing."
"Where the fuck did all these bodies go - it was pulverized - no bones, no DNA was found, I didn’t see no body parts" added Dietl, who was on the scene to help rescue workers and firefighters shortly after the towers’ collapse.
Dietl confirmed that the collapse of WTC 7 was known ahead of time and that he was told to stay away from the building.
The former detective also mentioned how his former friend FBI agent John O’Neill, who died in the towers, was prevented by the FBI from prosecuting Bin Laden and other Al-Qaeda members.
However, Dietl’s claim that "they never dreamt in a million years the tragedy that happened would happen" in the context of his assertion that the faulty construction of the towers contributed to their sudden collapse is demonstrably false.
Numerous different World Trade Center designers and construction specialists are on record as having ruled out the possibility that multiple commercial jetliner impacts could bring the towers down.
A February 3, 1964 white paper which was written during the design phase of the towers stated, "The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707 DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact."
In 2001, Leslie Robertson, one of the two original structural engineers for the World Trade Center, stated, "The twin towers were in fact the first structures outside the military and nuclear industries designed to resist the impact of a jet airplane."
Also in early 2001, Frank A. Demartini, on-site construction manager for the World Trade Center, said on camera, "The building was designed to have a fully loaded 707 crash into it. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door -- this intense grid -- and the jet plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting. It really does nothing to the screen netting."
Since Dietl still serves as Chairman of the New York State Security Guard Advisory Council, his comments are of great significance in the quest for a new investigation.
Grassroots effort stresses continuing the Ron Paul Revolution, restoring the spirit of freedom in the country and turning back the tide of sprawling foreign wars and disastrous economic policy
The High Tide could be a lifting anthem for the Ron Paul Revolution as it seeks ways to voice its message in the post-campaign era. The video features high quality 3-D animation and Dr. Ron Paul’s voice. It’s stunning imagery dramatically portrays the dark landscape of spreading wars and an unfolding economic wasteland that have resulted from bad policy.
It carries also the spirit of freedom that Ron Paul hoped his campaign would rekindle-- and in many ways already has-- as people across the country are now sparking debate over scaling back government power and following constitutionally-based policies.
Grassroots supporter Nate Evans (ArcFx, WeAreChange.org) donated months of work to put together the 3-D promo (click here for high quality) that will have to settle for underscoring the high-point of an unusual presidential campaign that has now receded from hopes of winning the GOP nomination. Nevertheless, the campaign succeeded in shedding light on the skewed policies of the phony candidates who shared the stage with him. His disenfranchisement in polls, electronic voting and media coverage demonstrated the manipulation over so-called free elections.
Ron Paul recently conceded that "convention victory" had been lost, but that the fight would continue. "Many victories have been achieved due to your hard work and enthusiasm," said Paul.
"I don’t mind playing a key role in the revolution, but it has to be more than a Ron Paul revolution," he said. Somehow, that is reflected in this animated video that transcends the mere man Ron Paul is individually and elevates instead the ideas and history his policy is based upon.
So, what will be the high mark of the Ron Paul Revolution, in their campaign for the presidency? What is its the lasting impact, and in what form will it continue?
Paul urges the continuation of meet-up groups, and even campaign races in effort to gain more delegates and take small victories where they are still available in the election, if only to stretch the political muscle for a future contest.
"At the rate our economy is slipping, we will likely see the disintegration of the American empire," said Paul. "Today’s events should be seen as a tremendous opportunity to change our country for the good."
The Ron Paul Revolution intends to make an lasting impression when it will march together in Washington. Which direction that will take us, is the next step.
Criminal conspirator, Larry Silverstein, who "earned" $4.6 billion on the murder of 3,000 people on September 11, 2001, refuses to answer questions about the destruction of Building Seven.
On Feb. 26th, 2008 9/11 Truth was discussed at the EU Parliament in Brussels. Seven MEPs and Mr. Fujita from the Japanese diet attended as well as many people from the 9/11 Truth movement, including Dr. David Griffin. MEP Chiesa from Italy was the host and co-producer of the 9/11 Truth documentary "Zero" which was also shown (but is not included in this video).
A 9/12/2001 interview by CBS News’ Dan Rather of a CIA veteran who suspects the 9/11 attacks were beyond the ability of Osama Bin Laden and who believes the reported capabilities of Bin Laden are more myth than fact.
Bohannan is a right wing pro-military radio voice, who's audience has probably NEVER been exposed to 9/11 truth issues. "The Shell Game" author, Steve Alten, came on after an Oil Executive's interview, at about 39:50 in the 1.5 hour show. At about 54:56 it gets REALLY interesting when a caller calls in to discuss 9/11 as a false flag attack. Which unleashes Alten into a deep discussion of 9/11 truth issues.
All hell brakes loose in the next few minutes, as Alten enters the realms of 9/11 truth, explaining to the stunned Bohanan and and his virgin (9/11 truth issue) audience that there is a mass 9/11 truth movement in America that involves engineers, police, private investigators, and many other experts challenging the official 9/11 story.
Alten gives Bohannan some rope at the beginning, before he yanks it to give Bohannan's virgin audience some powerful new issues to chew on. Alten takes on the BIG OIL guest (and big energy's lies) that preceded him on the show, as well as the rational for war in Iraq, BUT spends most of his time TAKING ON THE 9/11 COVER UP, War Games, Evidence Destruction at the WTC, and WTC BUILDING 7's MYSTERIOUS and UNINVESTIGATED COLLAPSE!
When Alten broaches 9/11 truth issues, Bohannan challenges Alten, with the 'you're telling me that you know facts that no one else in America knows about 9/11' line. Alten responds that "There is a massive 9/11 truth movement of highly competent professionals in America, that involves tens of thousands of activists and researchers."
Alten explains that false flag terror events often require that simultaneous war games be held to enable such false flag events to happen, and that is what happened on 9/11. Alten discovered this disturbing information while researching for his new historical fiction book, he explains to Bohannan.
Alten then talks about multiple war games mysteriously held to draw our Air Force fighters away from New York and DC on 9/11, that enabled the strikes of that day. Alten says, "Shocking to me, when I did my research for this book, was that there were 5 separate War Games being conducted in the North Eastern quadrant of our country with NORAD, which sent out jet fighters over parts of Alaska and Iceland and over Canada. Which pulled them out of the North Eastern section of the country. Bohannan, bristles, and then challenges, Alten, head on, "Are you suggesting United States complicity in the attacks of 9/11?"
Alten, "I'm just stating what happened. You can draw your own conclusions from it."
Bohannan, "Well I, you'd have to draw something a lot more serious than that. I mean it would have to show a, a-a-a series of connections, including of course, knowing that the attack was about to occur. Then you would be getting into, not only the, uh, the spirit of the book, "The Shell Game," but uh, but uh, serious implications." The show goes to break.
Bohannan (coming back from break): "We got interrupted by the break, but before that you were saying something interesting Steve, that there were, uh, war games being held at the time of 9/11, under uh, questionable timing. And here you'll have to go into some of the things you were telling me during the break, because the audience didn't get to hear those, but just tell me what it is that you say you've unearthed here."
Alten, "Well if I can read a quick paragraph from the book [The Shell Game], which will explain it, um . . ."
Bohannan, "Sure"
Alten (quoting from "The Shell Game"), "Did they, the US government intelligence community, know of a coming Al Qaeda attack before 9/11? YES, in fact, there were at least 5 intelligence services across that country that warned us. Did they try to stop them? YES, but they were prevented from doing so."
Bohannan cuts in, exasperated, "On that particular date, we knew there was an attack coming!?"
Alten, "Yes."
Bohannan, "Who knew?"
Alten, again quoting facts from his historical novel "The Shell Game", continues, "Well, FBI field agents in both Minneapolis and Phoenix who were close to exposing the plot, were repeatedly and purposefully bottle necked from taking action by a single supervisor, Dave Frasca, who would later receive a PROMOTION for his actions. On the day of the attacks the Joint Chiefs [of Staff] under President Bush and Dick Cheney's personal directions, scheduled and conducted 5 separate war game drills that purposely pulled interceptor jets away from the North Eastern aerospace corridor, while DELIBERATELY inserting false blips on air traffic screens, to simulate, of all things, hijacked airliners. Military jets that routinely intercept aircraft within minutes, were delayed an unfathomable 80 MINUTES. Most never even entered the fray, while dedicated pilots and air traffic controllers desperately tried to determine what was real from what was staged. An FAA administrator, quote unquote, "ACCIDENTALLY" destroyed the recordings of the day's tragic events, and he too was later promoted." Alten continues after quoting his book [The Shell Game], "Now, those are the FACTS. "
Bohannan, "Now again, we're speaking from your work of fiction, but you say, that, that in this particular case, you are using factual material?"
Alten, "The Shell Game is filled with factual material, and . . ."
Bohannan, "And this was some of that factual material."
Alten, "Yes, this was some of the factual material."
Bohannan, "Now, how come, uh, we have not had hearings on this, and this has been blown wide open, and uh, impeachment proceedings against the Vice President has, etc. etc. etc. I mean how come you're the ONLY person who's found this and no one else has seen fit to pursue this?"
Alten, "Actually there are tens of thousands of people that have found it, and that make up part of the 9/11 truth movement. I'm not saying that I'm part of the movement."
Bohannan, "Well, uh . . ."
Alten, "There are architects and engineers, analysts, physicists, investigators, private investigators, there's police investigators . . ."
Bohannan, "But, the government's not interested in pursuing this, because we wished, what, to cover up this, is this what we're talking about here? And not ONE person involved in this is, is, patriotic enough to expose this. There's a vast conspiracy that was ah, ah, behind the purposeful destruction of, of, uh, I guess Donald Rumsfeld wasn't behind it since he almost got killed at the Pentagon, but . . ."
Alten, "Rumsfeld wasn't anywhere near where the Pentagon got hit"
Bohannan, "Rumsfeld was in the Pentagon, what are you talking about? He was in the building, he helped rescue people."
Alten, "Well, uh, let me just point out a couple more of the things, and you can come to your own conclusions."
Alten again quotes from his book [The Shell Game], "Intelligence agencies around the world knew how and when the attacks were to occur but there warnings were ignored. Wall Street investors certainly knew a day before the attacks, domestic and foreign investors placed an unprecedented number of "put orders," a put order being a leveraged bet that a stock would drop on the airlines and companies that would suffer devastating losses [on 9/11]. Now, I can go on and on about these CONVENIENT COINCIDENCES. I'm not a conspiracy theorist . . ."
Bohannan, "OF COURSE YOU ARE! You put this stuff forward here, and say well draw your own conclusions, but why have you not reported this to, uh, the appropriate Congressional oversight, or are they part of the cover up also?"
Alten [had been trying to cut in over the above assertions], "I, I'm just an author of fiction . . ." Bohannan, "Yeah, I would agree . . ."
Alten, "There are thousands of people out there who have attempted to do these things. You have to realize that the 9/11 . . . let me ask you a question, when we were investigating Monica Lewinski's stained dress we invested 80 MILLION dollars of our tax payer money to investigate that stained dress. You know how much the 9/11 investigations were budgeted?"
Bohannan, "No, I couldn't site a figure."
Alten, "13 million dollars. Did you know that the . . . World Trade Center . . ."
Bohanna, "Well that may be a misallocation of tax dollars, but that doesn't mean that . . ."
Atlen, "The World Trade Center, the World Trade Center represented a crime scene, a federal crime scene. All of the evidence from that federal crime scene was kept from FEMA, kept from police, kept from the FBI. Homeland Security came in, took it and shipped it to China and buried [that evidence]"
Bohannan, "Shipped WHAT to China?"
Alten, "All the debris from the World Trade Center."
Bohannan, "It was not shipped to China, it was . . ."
Alten, "Check your facts."
Bohannan, "I certainly will. I will absolutely check that. Well, I guess we could stay with that all day, but as you say, draw your own conclusions."
Alten goes on in the interview to explain to Bohannan's [virgin listeners as regards 9/11 truth audience] the goals of PNAC, and that elements of the government made 9/11 happen to enact the PNAC goal of a "New Pearl Harbor." He says the fox is guarding the hen house, and your asking them to investigate it.
Bohannan says, "Well there is a conspiracy, we'll be right back."
Listen to this entire historic interview [MUCH MORE 9/11 TRUTH ISSUES TO LISTEN TO] at the below link where you'll hear, for example: Alten says that World Trade Center 7 was IMPLODED, and asks "How do you lose a 47 story building with no explanation as to why it collapsed?"
Bohannan, "I wouldn't know, I'd have to . . ." Alten, "But, we accept it, we accept it as a fact that ... well, it just collapsed. A 47 STORY BUILDING JUST COLLAPSED. "
Bohannan, "Well I wouldn't know . . . surrounding debris hit it, I wouldn't know."
Alten, "The 23rd floor of that building was where the intelligence services had there installations and they were running in and out of there the entire day. 5 hours after the World Trade Centers [towers] collapsed, that building mysteriously collapsed."
Bohannan, "Welp, I guess you'd just have to . . . what was the name of that building again?"
Alten, "World Trade Center 7."
To have Steve Alten on mainstream national media, at a time when 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerry is about to announce the need for a permanent 9/11 investigative body to handle new surfacing 9/11 facts, and when the European Parliament held a 9/11 truth event, after the head of the Japanese opposition party on national television made a case of 9/11 as an inside job . . . is a powerful thing to have happen.
After seeing Willie Nelson and the French Oscar winning actress attacked by corporate media for asking hard 9/11 questions, NY Times best selling novelist, Steve Alten, remained undaunted and fearless in his assault of the official 9/11 myth, and its increasingly spurious "facts." SHARE THIS interview WIDELY, POST IT EVERYWHERE. Write articles about it. Blog it! Etc. etc. BECOME THE MEDIA !
WHY? Because if the 9/11 truth seekers among us do everything we can to drive "The Shell Game" to 1 on the New York Times best seller list, we will insure that explosive interviews like this exposing hard 9/11 questions, get asked aired again, and again, and again. 9/11 truth has a new hero, and his name is Steve Alten. Be apart of making history, and finally awakening America to the fact they've been lied to about 9/11. "The Shell Game," and its author are powerful tools for the 9/11 truth movement to make the most of.
ABC News still claims it was close-fought, despite fact that margin of victory was Congressman's biggest ever in District 14
Ron Paul comprehensively defeated main rival Chris Peden last night to retain his Congressional seat and display a metaphorical middle finger to Neo-Con attack dogs who had attempted to deceive the public into doubting the Congressman's chances by making out it was a close-fought race.
Neo-Cons have egg on their faces this morning after Paul hammered Peden 70-30 to retain his seat in the House of Congress.
Even after the results came in, ABC News were still at it, claiming today, "The fiery Republican with a libertarian bent survived a strong challenge to his day job in Congress on Tuesday, besting a well-funded challenger."
Writing that Paul's presidential run, "Nearly came back to bite him at home," the report conveniently fails to mention the margin by which Paul tanked his opponent - a margin 10 points higher than when Paul defeated Democrat Shane Sklar in 2006 and his easiest victory in any Congressional election since he first ran for District 14.
The establishment media and fawning neo-libs like Wonkette did their level best to prop-up Peden as someone who had a legitimate chance of challenging Paul for his Congressional seat, a clear double-standard considering the fact that they wrote off Ron Paul's presidential aspirations from the very start.
In a sophomoric hit piece, The Lone Star Times website, which proudly displays a Peden for Congress banner, cited a report that claimed "Peden holds a double-digit lead over "the taxpayer's best friend."
Under the headline, Could Ron Paul Really Fall?, the site quoted a Pajamas Media blog that falsely claimed, "Polls show Dr. Paul falling behind relatively unknown challenger Chris Peden in his 14th Texas District endangering his congressional seat in the Texas primary."
Other establishment media mouthpieces like The Nation attempted to get a Pedenphile bandwagon rolling by hoaxing readers into thinking the Councilman had a chance of beating Paul, when independent polls clearly showed the Congressman was drubbing his opponent, who was a virtual unknown amongst District 14 residents.
"Some Washington insiders would have you believe that Republicans no longer believe in the principles our country and party were founded upon, but the voters in my district have once again proven them wrong," Mr. Paul said, in a statement. "The message of freedom is popular, and I will continue to trumpet it in Congress and across America as I fight on behalf of the conservative, common sense values which made our country so great."
In response to the arrest of a 9/11 demonstrator during a Bill Clinton appearance in Corpus Christi, corporate media shill and former Republican Congress critter Joe Scarborough and his co-hosts demanded 9/11 truthers be tasered and taken to detention camps. "Where's the taser?" Joe wants to know as MSNBC runs footage of the man's arrest. "Tase him!" His co-host adds: "Led away in handcuffs and hopefully taken to one of those secret prisons in eastern Europe and never to be heard from again… I hope we have a special prison for 9/11 conspiracy theorists."
In other words, the corporate behemoth MSNBC believes people who disagree with the government not only do not deserve First Amendment rights and protection, but also believe demonstrators should be kidnapped by the CIA and taken to a "special prison" to be tortured and ultimately killed, as this is the fate of many who disappear suffer.
Is it possible the United States is about to become like Pinochet's Chile? In 1973, thanks to the CIA and U.S. corporations, Chile became a brutal police state. Chileans were subjected to systematic and massive violations of their most basic human rights. Official figures indicate that nearly 3,000 people were executed, disappeared or lost their lives as a result of torture and political violence. It would seem "Morning Joe" would enthusiastically welcome the installation of a fascist state where those he disagrees with are disappeared, tortured, and murdered.
Last October, CNN host Glenn Beck called 9/11 truthers "insane" and "dangerous anarchists" in response to 9/11 truthers infiltrating the Real Time with Bill Maher show. "These truthers are exactly the kind of people who want to rock this nation's foundation, tear us apart and plant the seeds of dissatisfaction in all of us… [this is] the kind of group a Timothy McVeigh would come from," declared Beck, setting a precedence followed this morning by the scurrilous Joe Scarborough and his complaisant minions.
"In thousands of 9/11 protests over the course of the last six years, not one person has been arrested for violent conduct," Steve Watson wrote at the time. "To cart blanches suggest that the truth movement is dangerous, 'a threat to children' and intent on violence is extremely inflammatory and indicates just how afraid of investigating and debating the facts people like Glen Beck actually are."
The core of the 9/11 truth movement is composed of highly educated and progressive individuals who are strictly opposed to violence and are intent on protecting a free and peaceful society which has been under dire threat ever since the attacks of 9/11 and the ensuing cover up.
Furthermore the movement represents the very antithesis of anarchism in that it is actively seeking to restore and protect our traditional form of government which has been usurped by an unaccountable cabal that continues to operate outside of Constitutional law and with little restraint using 9/11 as justification.
Indeed, Beck and Scarborough are calling for such draconian measures simply because the 9/11 truth movement is comprised "of highly educated and progressive individuals who are strictly opposed to violence" and because of this they must be demonized as a threat to national security and thus the government must kidnap, torture, and murder them. Although Scarborough did not suggest 9/11 truth "idiots" be murdered, this is of course the ultimate fate of those who oppose militarized fascism, now gaining speed in the United States.
So free thought and free speech belong in a prison camp? Then every person in the Morning Joe studio should be sent off to a prison camp. Would they comply?
Does anyone in media know the definition ofFREE? Do you?
TruthgoneWild is PRO America. TruthgoneWild is not, in any way, connected to, or supportive of, any person(s) who engage in violent acts towards anyone or anything, for any reason. TruthgoneWild is not, and will never be, associated with, or support, any person(s) who are involved with any kind of religious, extremist, occultist, terrorist organization(s). TruthgoneWild is not responsible for any of the people who read the TruthgoneWild blog. TruthgoneWild posts consist of information copied from other sources and a source link is provided for the reader. TruthgoneWild is not responsible for any of the authors' content. Parental discretion is advised.
TruthgoneWild is exercising our 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech. Those who attempt to hinder this right to free speech will be held accountable for their actions in a court of law. TruthgoneWild is not anti government. TruthgoneWild is anti corruption. And we the people have every right to know who in our government is corrupt.
