Jun 242016
 

Yesterday morning we woke up to the great news that one of Britain’s largest newspapers had just published a story on WTC 7 Evaluation. This computer modeling study of World Trade Center Building 7’s collapse is being conducted by engineers at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) and is being sponsored by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth). You can check out the article here.

The Daily Express receives an average of 1.3 million visitors each day and has a daily print circulation of 400,000. Although the article starts off with the customary kneejerk sensationalism, it quickly turns to neutrally reporting on the unbiased research being done by UAF’s Dr. Leroy Hulsey into how and why WTC 7 fell.

While the Daily Express is generally known for its isolationist, rightwing views, this isn’t the first time it has published a balanced piece on the efforts of the 9/11 Truth Movement. In February, it profiled Matt Campbell, the Briton who lost his brother Geoff on 9/11 and is actively calling upon UK authorities to open an inquest into his brother’s death.

We would like to give a big thank you to everyone who has supported and promoted the WTC 7 Evaluation project. If you would like to learn more about it and get behind it, visit WTC7Evaluation.org.

Now that the university is in its summer session, Dr. Hulsey and his team are back to working full-time on the study. We look forward to reporting their progress at the end of the summer!

Jun 142016
 

Coleen Rowley was interviewed on RNZ Morning Report on the topic of the Orlando shooting. Here is RNZ’s promo:

FBI trying to determine killer’s motive in mass shooting

8:21 AM.The FBI Director James Comey says authorities are still trying to determine the killer’s motives, but there is no indication he was part of an organised terror network, although he may have been inspired by them. Coleen Rowley is a former FBI special agent and division counsel whose May 2002 memo to the FBI Director exposed some of the FBI’s pre-9/11 failures, and was named one of TIME magazine’s “Persons of the Year” that year.

Here is the link to the interview:
http://podcast.radionz.co.nz/mnr/mnr-20160614-0821-fbi_trying_to_determine_killers_motive_in_mass_shooting-048.mp3

 Posted by at 8:56 am
Jun 132016
 

Posted on June 13, 2016 by Kevin Ryan

The terrorist event in Orlando on June 12th demonstrated features that were present in numerous recent terrorist acts. For example the suspect was quickly killed and the official account immediately attempted to blame the attacks on Islam. However, as with most terrorism in the U.S., the suspect Omar Mateen had suspicious links to the FBI. He also worked for a company with connections to prior terrorist events.

Read article here

Jun 062016
 

By Wayne Madsen
Global Research, June 05, 2016
waynemadsenreport.com 31 May 2016

Three conspirators—American neocons, Saudi Arabia, and Israel—that successfully pulled off the crime of the 21st century, namely the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, are infighting to the point that the layers of secrecy surrounding the 9/11 attacks are beginning to wither away.

The weakest link in the troika of conspirators is Saudi Arabia, the country that provided the manpower, finances, and hijacker personnel for the cover story—”Al Qaeda did it”—for 9/11. Stung by U.S. congressional moves to allow families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia and calls for the Obama administration to release 28 classified pages in the joint Congressional Inquiry on 9/11 intelligence failures to the public, the Saudi government is now pushing the story that the U.S. government was responsible for carrying out the 9/11 attack.

Read article here

Jun 012016
 

KSM . Motion to Recuse Military Judge (Army Colonel James Pohl) and the Current Prosecution Team and for Further Appropriate Relief. 10.May, 2016.


 

3. OVERVIEW.

“This motion arises from facts and events summarized below, and described in in more detail in references 1-6, Classified Attachment B.

In summary, the government sought permission from the Military Commission to dispose of certain evidence that had important guilt-phase and mitigation value. The defense filed an objection to the proposed disposal, and the Military Judge issued an order directing the government to ensure the evidence was not destroyed pending further order of this Commission.

As a result, counsel for Mr. Mohammad reasonably understood that timely notice would be provided if the Commission decided to alter or rescind the Order and permit the government to destroy the evidence. In direct reliance on the Commission’s assurances, Mr. Mohammad refrained from seeking further orders to maintain the status quo, to include a stay from the Commission, or interlocutory relief or writ of prohibition to prevent the destruction of the evidence.

Indeed, unless and until the Commission provided defense counsel further notice, and the defense were able to allege that the order barring destruction been withdrawn or substantively revised, initiating litigation of an appeal or a writ of prohibition would have been premature as a matter of law.

Meanwhile, during the period that the controlling order remained in effect publicly, the government communicated ex parte and in camera with the Military Judge seeking authorization to destroy the evidence; the Military Judge, in an ex parte, sealed and classified order, which the defense was not permitted to read, GRANTED the government’s request; and the government hereafter destroyed the evidence – all without giving fully-cleared defense counsel for Mr. Mohammad even a hint as to the changes until more than 18 months after the Commission’s issuance of the ex-parte destruction order, and waiting more than 20 months before disclosing to cleared defense counsel a partially-redacted though still classified version of the destruction order.” [emphasis added]

“The test for the appearance of partiality on the part of a judge so as to require recusal is whether an objective, disinterested observer fully informed of the facts would entertain a significant doubt that justice was done. The question to be asked is: Would a hypothetical onlooker be trouble by what happened?”[pp 12 below]


Would the hypothetical onlooker, knowing a judge had secretly – in collusion with government prosecution, allowed destruction of evidence helpful to the the defence […. evidence damaging to the prosecution….’] while pretending to the defense the evidence was protected from destruction, for 18 months;  Would a ‘hypothetical onlooker’ be deeply troubled by that?

‘Being troubled’ would depend on whether I am awake or asleep.  Upon whether Habeas Corpus and rule-of-Law means anything atall except something dead. It depends whether my reading includes/excludes all evidence gained since that terrible day holding the Official Commission Theory, a fabrication., a myth built around the magic-bolt myth-maker ZELIKOW, who closed off any evidence contrary to his original brief, as DULLES did 50 years before him. It depends whether I have read the Senate Select Committee Investigations into the black sites where it was categorical the ‘informations gained’ [KSM/waterboarded 183 times] were ‘impossible to assess [the effectiveness of the CIA’s enhanced interro[r]gation techniques] without violating “Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects” regarding human experimentation. (pp.13 of 19.SenateSelectCommittee on Intelligence) wherein the OCT cannot/would not/has not withstood even basic scrutiny since its publication – is a basic fantasy ; as this case clearly indicates…Evidence helpful to the defence has been officially destroyed. Not only that, but (pp7.) “The prosecution further informed the defense, and Military Judge, that the government never had any intention of disclosing the material, exculpatory evidence to the defense, and in the future it will not disclose similar evidence to the defense, irrespective of the sanctions that the Military Commission might impose for the government’s willful behaviour.” This from the land of the free and home of the brave, where mercenary psychologists with no practical interro(r)gation skills, [Jensen and Mitchell,] can make millions of dollars as privateers torturing out the 911 narrative.

Habeas Corpus RIP.


 

 

 

 


 

MEANWHILE On the other side of the Atlantic, in identical vein, an identical twin :

JIT: “there will be no public release of a final report on MH17 “

 Posted by at 11:56 pm
May 282016
 

German TV Show ‘Galileo’ Airs Special on AE911Truth to Audience of Two Million Viewers

On Monday, May 23, one of Germany’s most popular television shows, “Galileo,” aired a 15-minute segment about the ongoing efforts of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and 9/11 family member Bob McIlvaine.

“Galileo” reaches an audience of some two million in Germany each day and is syndicated across Europe.

May 252016
 

May 19, 2016Special Dispatch No.6438
Article In Saudi Daily: U.S. Planned, Carried Out 9/11 Attacks – But Blames Others For Them

On the eve of President Obama’s April 2016 visit to Saudi Arabia, the U.S. Congress began debating the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), that would, inter alia, allow the families of victims of the September 11 attacks to sue the Saudi government for damages. Also in April 2016, the New York Times published that a 2002 congressional inquiry into the 9/11 attacks had found that Saudi officials living in the United States at the time had a hand in the plot. The commission’s conclusions, said the paper, were specified in a report that has not been released publicly.[1]
The JASTA bill, which was passed by the Senate on May 17, 2016, triggered fury in Saudi Arabia, expressed both in statements by the Saudi foreign minister and in scathing attacks on the U.S. in the Saudi press.[2] On April 28, 2016, the London-based Saudi daily Al-Hayat published an exceptionally harsh article on this topic by Saudi legal expert Katib Al-Shammari, who argued that the U.S. itself had planned and carried out 9/11, while placing the blame on a shifting series of others – first Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, then Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq, and now Saudi Arabia. He wrote that American threats to reveal documents that supposedly point to Saudi involvement in 9/11 are part of standard U.S. policy of exposing archival documents to use as leverage against various countries – which he calls “victory by means of archives.”
Following are excerpts from Al-Shammari’s article:[3]
“Those who follow American policy see that it is built upon the principle of advance planning and future probabilities. This is because it occasionally presents a certain topic to a country that it does not wish [to bring up] at that time but [that it is] reserving in its archives as an ace to play [at a later date] in order to pressure that country. Anyone revisiting… [statements by] George H.W. Bush regarding Operation Desert Storm might find that he acknowledged that the U.S. Army could have invaded Iraq in the 1990s, but that [the Americans] had preferred to keep Saddam Hussein around as a bargaining chip for [use against] other Gulf states. However, once the Shi’ite wave began to advance, the Americans wanted to get rid of Saddam Hussein, since they no longer saw him as an ace up their sleeve.
“September 11 is one of winning cards in the American archives, because all the wise people in the world who are experts on American policy and who analyze the images and the videos [of 9/11] agree unanimously that what happened in the [Twin] Towers was a purely American action, planned and carried out within the U.S. Proof of this is the sequence of continuous explosions that dramatically ripped through both buildings… Expert structural engineers demolished them with explosives, while the planes crashing [into them] only gave the green light for the detonation – they were not the reason for the collapse. But the U.S. still spreads blame in all directions. [This policy] can be dubbed ‘victory by means of archives.’

Read article here

May 242016
 

www.ae911truth.org

At the Annual Business Meeting of the American Institute of Architects (AIA) held in Philadelphia on May 21, 2016, representatives of the AIA’s local chapters, state organizations, and national governing bodies voted on whether the AIA should officially support a new WTC 7 investigation.

Resolution 16-3, which was sponsored by 97 AIA members affiliated with AE911Truth, garnered 11% of the delegates’ votes, losing 529 to 4,176. The 11% tally represents nearly a threefold increase over the 4% won last year.

Dan Barnum, a fellow of the AIA and an AE911Truth board member, introduced the resolution with Bob McIlvaine, a 9/11 family member and Philadelphia native, standing by his side.

Two opponents of the resolution and Richard Gage then spoke. After that point, another opponent called the question and the room voted in favor — leaving three supporters, who had been standing at their microphones from the beginning, without a chance to speak. Dan Barnum ended with a powerful closing speech (watch it here) before the vote took place.

Double-Digit Support Highlights Changing Attitudes

For those of us who were present both last year and this year, the tone of the debate was strikingly different. We felt a much higher degree of receptiveness, as well as a reluctance by opponents of the resolution to enthusiastically champion the official account.

Whereas last year the AIA board issued a lengthy position expressing wholehearted endorsement of the 9/11 Commission, FEMA/ASCE, and NIST reports, the board’s position this year was short and tepid. It read as follows:

“The Board has concluded that this matter has been investigated thoroughly by competent authorities with reasonable conclusions, and does not warrant further investigation. It therefore does not support this resolution.”

Only one opponent — the first to take the floor — echoed the board’s meek endorsement of the official reports. The second person to speak in opposition delivered nothing but vitriol, and the third opponent called the question.

Meanwhile, throughout the three-day convention, we witnessed a continuous outpouring of support at our booth. Many delegates stopped by to register their intention to vote “yes” and to sign the petition or to ask questions if they were undecided.

Dan Barnum, FAIA, and the WTC 7 Resolution Vote at the 2016 AIA Business Meeting

“I’m a veteran of the Vietnam War. The U.S. involvement in Vietnam started after the Gulf of Tonkin incident, which was a lie. That war led to 55,000 or 56,000 Americans being killed. Our government sent 56,000 people to their death. It was based on a lie. We are now in the midst of a couple of wars based on a lie. How long are we going to put up with stuff based on lies? How long do we want to go on living based on lies? It’s time to seek truth.”

Dan Barnum, FAIA, high-rise architect and AE911Truth board member, speaking alongside Bob McIlvaine, 9/11 Family Member, in Philadelphia on May 21, 2016.

Learn more >> http://bit.ly/AE2016AIAupdate
Gulf of Tonkin U.S. Fabricated Incident >> http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB132/press20051201.htm

FAIA definition: Fellow of the American Institute of Architects (FAIA) is a post-nominal title designating an individual who has been named a fellow of the American Institute of Architects. Fellowship is bestowed by the American Institute of Architects on AIA-member architects who have made outstanding contributions to the profession through design excellence, contributions in the field of architectural education, or contributions to the advancement of the profession.

Fellowships are awarded according to the following categories of nomination:

To promote the aesthetic, scientific, and practical efficiency of the profession;To advance the science and art of planning and building by advancing the standards of architecture education, training, and practice;To coordinate the building industry and the profession of architecture;To ensure the advancement of the living standards of people through their improved environment;To make the profession of ever-increasing service to society.

In 2014, fewer than 3,200 of the more than 80,000 AIA members are Fellows. Dan Barnum is one of those few “outstanding contributions to the profession,” as dictated by the AIA.

May 102016
 

Price for Witnessing Against War
by Ray McGovern, May 09, 2016

Fr. Daniel Berrigan’s funeral was being live-streamed Friday, as I started to write this, which seems only fitting. Dan’s witness and writing have been a constantly rechargeable battery for my moral compass.

Live-streaming (arranged by America magazine) was the next-best thing to being at the funeral in person. And it brought back memories of getting shoehorned into West Baltimore’s St. Peter Claver church in early December 2002 for an equally moving celebration of the life of Dan’s younger brother, Fr. Phil Berrigan.

Homilist Fr. Steve Kelly, S.J., who has spent more than a decade in this or that prison for nonviolent resistance to war began with some Berrigan-style Irish humor: “Let members of the FBI assigned here today validate that it is Daniel Berrigan’s funeral Mass of the Resurrection, so they can complete and perhaps close their files. ‘Death has no dominion!’ to quote Daniel’s friend William Stringfellow.”

Kelly then minced no words in calling out “appointed pastors who collude with structures of domination, blessing the bombs.”

Read article here