This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Movement to Declassify 9/11 Information Gathers Momentum ... 9/11 Commission Chairs and Congressmen Call for Declassification
The 9/11 Commission Co-Chairs - Lee Hamilton and Thomas Kean - have called for the 28-page section of the 9/11 Commission Report which is classified to be declassified. Kean said that 60-70% of what was classified shouldn't have been classified in the first place:
Congressman Thomas Massie read the 28 classified pages of the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry into 9/11 (the joint Senate and House investigation into 9/11) and immediately called for them to be released to the public:
A bipartisan bill - introduced by congressmen Walter B. Jones (Republican from North Carolina) and Stephen Lynch (Democrat from Massachusetts) - would declassify the 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry which implicate the Saudi government.
Former Congressman Ron Paul is also demanding the 28 pages be declassified:
The Co-Chair of the congressional investigation into 9/11 - Bob Graham - and 9/11 Commissioner and former Senator Bob Kerrey are calling for either a “permanent 9/11 commission” or a new 9/11 investigation to get to the bottom of it.
Senator Graham has lobbied Obama for years to release the 28 pages and to reopen the investigation, but Obama has refused. The former Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee and 9/11 investigator has even resorted to filing Freedom of Information requests to obtain information, but the Obama administration is still stonewalling:
Graham said that like the 28 pages in the 9/11 inquiry, the Sarasota case is being “covered up” by U.S. intelligence. Graham has been fighting to get the FBI to release the details of this investigation with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and litigation. But so far the bureau has stalled and stonewalled, he said.
And high-level former NSA official Thomas Drake provided testimony to the 9/11 investigations documenting that the "official story" of 9/11 makes little sense, as the intelligence agencies had all of the information they needed to stop it. Drake's testimony has - for no real reason - been classified. Drake is seeking to declassify his testimony to the 9/11 Commission:
I would argue for declassification and release because the 9/11 Commission asked for it in the public interest, my testimony was given to Congress via testimony (oral and written) to investigators as a material witness and whistleblower, because of NSA’s coverup of its accountability for 9/11, and the coverup committed by NSA to obstruct official Congressional investigations, plus declassification is timely in terms of ongoing efforts to reform NSA by Congress and the President.
I do know that my testimony and evidence was fully suppressed and censored as a deep state secret - so secret that it was not included in the classified report of the 9/11 Joint Inquiry.
Indeed, the 9/11 Commission admits that it never got all of the facts ... and many officials are eager to spill the beans about what they know.
Still Urgent Today
Ancient history, you say? Graham notes:
Although it's been more than a decade ago when this horrific event occurred, I think [the questions of who supported the attacks] have real consequences to U.S. actions today.
As Graham told PBS:
We need to have this information now because it’s relevant to the threat that the people of the United States are facing today.
Postscript: People may not remember now, but – at the time – the supposed Iraqi state sponsorship of 9/11 was at least as important a justification for the Iraq war as the alleged weapons of mass destruction. This claim that Iraq is linked to 9/11 has since been debunked by the 9/11 Commission, top government officials, and even – long after they alleged such a link – Bush and Cheney themselves.
But 70% of the American public believed it at the time, and 85% of U.S. troops believed the U.S. mission in Iraq was "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the 9-11 attacks."
Only last year, John Glaser noted:
Significant portions of Americans still believe that Saddam and al-Qaeda were in cahoots and cooperated in the 9/11 attacks. The reason is simple: the administration told them this lie.
An investigation by a committee in the House of Representatives in 2004 identified “237 misleading statements about the threat posed by Iraq that were made by President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary Rumsfeld, Secretary Powell, and National Security Advisor Rice. These statements were made in 125 separate appearances, consisting of 40 speeches, 26 press conferences and briefings, 53 interviews, 4 written statements, and 2 congressional testimonies.”
According to the committee, at least 61 separate statements “misrepresented Iraq’s ties to al-Qaeda.” A Senate investigation in 2006 also covered these lies.
Keeping this lie afloat took some work. The Bush administration, primarily Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld, “applied relentless pressure on interrogators to use harsh methods on detainees in part to find evidence of cooperation between al Qaida and the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein’s regime,” McClatchy reported in 2009.
According to Lawrence Wilkerson, chief of staff to Bush’s Secretary of State Powell, “the administration authorized harsh interrogation” in 2002, and “its principal priority for intelligence was not aimed at pre-empting another terrorist attack on the U.S. but discovering a smoking gun linking Iraq and al-Qa’ida.”
Wilkerson is right.
In other words, the failure to conduct a real 9/11 investigation contributed to the Iraq war, torture, and the failure to fix fundamental weaknesses in - and threats to - America's national security.
»
- advertisements -
The passengers wouldn't have allowed it to go that far.
On at least one of the planes were New Yorkers. If you know anything about New Yorkers, you'll realize that they don't take shit from anyone. They'd beat the shit out of someone for a lot less than a box cutter.
"The passengers wouldn't have allowed it to go that far.
On at least one of the planes were New Yorkers. If you know anything about New Yorkers, you'll realize that they don't take shit from anyone. They'd beat the shit out of someone for a lot less than a box cutter."
I don't think the hijackers were sitting in coach.
Ridiculous. You think the hi-jackers gave the passengers enough time to figure what was going on and react? You see a scuffle going on in the front of the plane and what looks like blood; it takes time to process. While processing, the pilots are dead and the flight deck sealed.
Prior to 9/11, planes were hijacked by men with machine guns. In all of aviation history prior to 9/11, people used guns to hijack planes. Period. No hijacker with a functioning frontal lobe would have considered using any other type of weapon.
The government is now telling us to believe in assault with a deadly package opener. That's like telling me to be afraid of the UPS guy or the Fedex guy. Spare me the idiocy.
Should we also believe that World Trade Center building number 7, which wasn't hit by a plane or any jet fuel, collapsed on its own out of sympathy for the other buildings?
Should we dismiss the accounts of hundreds of NYC firefighters that they heard explosives going off just prior to the collapse of the main World Trade Center towers?
Should we forget about the fact that there was no plane debris on the lawn of the Pentagon after a plane supposedly hit it? Titanium plane engines don't just evaporate into thin air. It's more likely that a missle, which is significantly smaller than a passenger plane, hit the Pentagon.
"Should we forget about the fact that there was no plane debris on the lawn of the Pentagon after a plane supposedly hit it?"
There was debris. It was photographed as it sat on the lawn.
http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html
The alleged debris was very conveniently photographed in isolation. So, there's no indication that it was situated in front of the Pentagon. It's very easy to drop a few metal pieces on some grass somehere and photograph it.
And where are the huge titanium engines? Titanium has an incredibly high melting point and doesn't simply evaporate.
Where are the passenger seats?
Where are the charred bodies of the passengers?
There's never been a crash like this before in world history. The debris field should have been giant. Instead, it's like an immaculate living room right out of Martha Stewart Living.
Let us also not forget the amazing Pentagon lawn, which was somehow left undamaged.
The lawn in front of the Pentagon was in remarkably great shape. A large passenger plane would have torn up the grass completely...unless of course you believe that a passenger plane can miraculously fly down to mere inches off the ground and fly into a building while remaining perfectly parallel to the ground. And Arabs with barely any flight training are supposed to have pulled off this magical feat. Penn and Teller would be impressed.
"The alleged debris was very conveniently photographed in isolation. So, there's no indication that it was situated in front of the Pentagon. It's very easy to drop a few metal pieces on some grass somehere and photograph it."
http://www.911myths.com/html/pentagon_14.html
That looks like The Pentagon sitting behind that piece of American Airlines jetliner skin.
"That looks like The Pentagon sitting behind that piece of American Airlines jetliner skin."
Yes down arrows, that is The Pentagon behind that piece of airliner skin, sitting on the lawn. Obviously you never get tired of ignoring the truth.
Funny how much mileage they get out of the only piece of the alleged airliner's skin ever shown in photographs. A piece that can be easily carried by a few guys, that has no sign of fire damage, and is probably from a crash scene that took place previously. Maybe the confiscated surveillance tapes are hiding frantic efforts to stage a "crash scene" as well as the alleged airliner. And why was Rumsfeld out there running around on the pristine lawn minutes after it happened?
"Funny how much mileage they get out of the only piece of the alleged airliner's skin ever shown in photographs. A piece that can be easily carried by a few guys, that has no sign of fire damage, and is probably from a crash scene that took place previously"
funny how 136 people witnessed a jetliner flying toward or striking The Pentagon.
There is no evidence of a missile. There is evidence of an airliner.
In fact, no critic has mentioned a specific missile. Every missile has it's own diameter, blast pattern and so on.
"Maybe the confiscated surveillance tapes are hiding frantic efforts to stage a "crash scene" as well as the alleged airliner."
136 people saw an airliner.
So whats your take on them collecting up the tapes? This ought to be good.
"So whats your take on them collecting up the tapes? This ought to be good."
136 witnesses saw a jetliner.
It was a major crime and they may have determined they wanted all surveillance camera footage in the general area. Why they won't release the footage, i don't know.
But you know there is nothing to see? So they were gathering evidence ay. Well lets see it? If there aint nothing to see give the tapes back to the people they took them from. Or were they on that chick hard drive too?
Down arrow, look at the photos.
"http://www.911myths.com/html/757_wreckage.html"
The photos speak for themselves, down arrow.
"Should we also believe that World Trade Center building number 7, which wasn't hit by a plane or any jet fuel, collapsed on its own out of sympathy for the other buildings?"
No, it collapsed because debris had struck it and it had been left to burn out of control for around 7 hours, prior to collapsing.
"Should we dismiss the accounts of hundreds of NYC firefighters that they heard explosives going off just prior to the collapse of the main World Trade Center towers?"
Explosive sounds do not mean that explosives are going off. People have remarked after a vehicle crash that it sounded like an explosion.
There was video that was shot, showing a reporter standing to the west of World trade 2 just before it fell. The rumble of the Tower begining to collapse can be heard. There were no explosive sounds just before the Tower started to collapse.
No. There was no fire in building number 7. That's completely false. And, being that building number 7 housed offices for the CIA, questions should be asked about it.
Also, here's an article about NYC firefighters hearing explosives going off in the towers:
Explosive Testimony: Revelations about the Twin Towers in the 9/11 Oral Histories
http://www.911truth.org/explosive-testimony-revelations-twin-towers-in-9...
WTC 7 was also wired to come down. The plane that went down in Penn. was supposed to hit it. Numerous witnesses heard explosions in it as well.
Buildings don't come straight down into their own footprint unless there is a controlled demolition and fires don't demolish steel framing.
"Buildings don't come straight down into their own footprint unless there is a controlled demolition and fires don't demolish steel framing."
A building collapses. Gravity pulls downward, regardless of the reason the building collapses.
Fire, as you know, weakens structural steel, which can result in catastrophic failure. It is the reason fire retardant is sprayed on steel.
@moneybots
Please explaine to me how:
A)Gravity increased to fit your narrative or
B)Explain how the Earth increased in either size or density to fit your model of gravity or
C)Fuck right off.
"@moneybots
Please explaine to me how:
A)Gravity increased to fit your narrative or
B)Explain how the Earth increased in either size or density to fit your model of gravity or
C)Fuck right off."
Gravity did not increase, except to controlled demolition comedians.
The earth did not increase in size or density, except to controlled demolition comedians.
The only thing increasing in this thread is your capacity for saying stupid shit.
"The only thing increasing in this thread is your capacity for saying stupid shit."
Again, just too funny.
Then how come all those people's kerosene heaters in their houses don't structually collapse after hours of running? Those are made of steel. Probably a lot thinner than steel used in buildings too.
Not to mention self-cleaning ovens, propane furnaces, oil-fired furnaces, etc.
Name one steel framed building that has collapsed from fire other than the 3 on 911.
"Name one steel framed building that has collapsed from fire other than the 3 on 911."
Irrelevant talking point. Winsor Tower collapsed.
Irrelevant talking point does not take into account that two buildings were struck by jetliners with trans continental fuel loads that started completely out of control fires. Irrelevant talking point does not take into account the specific design of the WTC buildings that collapsed.
Moneybots hasn't provided a single answer that isn't a phoned-in talking point. These trolls are getting easier to spot at least.
"Moneybots hasn't provided a single answer that isn't a phoned-in talking point"
Talking points is what i keep reading from the controlled demo comedians.
Won't answer the hard questions. Questions about WTC7 he answers in regards to WTC1/2. Troll is trolling
"Won't answer the hard questions. Questions about WTC7 he answers in regards to WTC1/2. Troll is trolling"
Comedy.
The hard question about Seven World Trade is how it could have been demoed without any physical evidence of such occurring. It looks like a demo is not proof of anything.
Comedy is you continuing to thrash and struggle
You mean the physical evidence that was physically removed before an investigation could be conducted? That physical evidence?
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html
WTC Steel Removal The Expeditious Destruction of the Evidence at Ground ZeroSteel was the structural material of the buildings. As such it was the most important evidence to preserve in order to puzzle out how the structures held up to the impacts and fires, but then disintegrated into rubble. Since the collapse of steel-framed skyscrapers due to fires is completely unprecedented, the steel should have been subjected to detailed analysis. So what did the authorities do with this key evidence of the vast crime and unprecedented engineering failure? They recycled it!
Some 185,101 tons of structural steel have been hauled away from Ground Zero. Most of the steel has been recycled as per the city's decision to swiftly send the wreckage to salvage yards in New Jersey. The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly. Last month, fire experts told Congress that about 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators did not have the authority to preserve the wreckage. 1The bulk of the steel was apparently shipped to China and India. The Chinese firm Baosteel purchased 50,000 tons at a rate of $120 per ton, compared to an average price of $160 paid by local mills in the previous year. 2
Mayor Bloomberg, a former engineering major, was not concerned about the destruction of the evidence:
If you want to take a look at the construction methods and the design, that's in this day and age what computers do. Just looking at a piece of metal generally doesn't tell you anything. 3The pace of the steel's removal was very rapid, even in the first weeks after the attack. By September 29, 130,000 tons of debris -- most of it apparently steel -- had been removed. 4
During the official investigation controlled by FEMA, one hundred fifty pieces of steel were saved for future study. 5 One hundred fifty pieces out of hundreds of thousands of pieces! Moreover it is not clear who made the decision to save these particular pieces. It is clear that the volunteer investigators were doing their work at the Fresh Kills dump, not at Ground Zero, so whatever steel they had access to was first picked over by the people running the cleanup operation.
You really are just phoning it in now, aren't you?
"The pace of the steel's removal was very rapid, even in the first weeks after the attack"
"By September 29, 130,000 tons of debris -- most of it apparently steel -- had been removed. 4 "
I remember being on vacation the first week of October, watching coverage on CNN. There was a huge pile of debris left. Most of the steel that was in the pile from day one, was not involved in the plane crash or fires.
"The city's hasty move has outraged many victims' families who believe the steel should have been examined more thoroughly."
As can be seen in the videos, two jetliners crashed into the Towers, starting uncontrolled fires. Later each collapsed.
In a perfect world every piece of steel could have been dusted for fingerprints, but this was a huge site and there were other considerations going on. The fact that they didn't dot all the i's and cross all the t's of every last piece of steel, doesn't prove an attempt to hide anything.
"It is clear that the volunteer investigators were doing their work at the Fresh Kills dump, not at Ground Zero, so whatever steel they had access to was first picked over by the people running the cleanup operation.
You really are just phoning it in now, aren't you?"
There isn't really anything to phone in. As the videos showed, a jetliner flew into each Tower, starting out of control fires. Each Tower later collapsed. It was due to the effect from the fires.
Misdirection. The comment sub-thread is on WTC7.
Moral relativism is comforting mind control to delusional sociopaths with low IQs...I don't need to ask you (or your operator) if you find your job difficult...
"You mean the physical evidence that was physically removed before an investigation could be conducted? That physical evidence?"
More comedy. It took months to remove debris and the debris was not removed in secret.
This next section reminds me of your comments....
Highly Sensitive GarbageGiven that the people in charge considered the steel garbage, useless to any investigation in this age of computer simulations, they certainly took pains to make sure it didn't end up anywhere other than a smelting furnace. They installed GPS locater devices on each of the trucks that was carrying loads away from Ground Zero, at a cost of $1000 each. The securitysolutions.com website has an article on the tracking system with this passage.
Ninety-nine percent of the drivers were extremely driven to do their jobs. But there were big concerns, because the loads consisted of highly sensitive material. One driver, for example, took an extended lunch break of an hour and a half. There was nothing criminal about that, but he was dismissed. 6FEMA's BPAT, who wrote the WTC Building Performance Study, were not given access to Ground Zero. Apparently, they were not even allowed to collect steel samples from the salvage yards. According to Appendix D of the Study:
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/groundzero/cleanup.html Collection and storage of steel members from the WTC site was not part of the BPS Team efforts sponsored by FEMA and the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE).LINK "...the debris was not removed in secret.".... Just clandestinely removed from public forensic criminal investigation and analysis. Tomayto...tomahto...
WTC 7 was sliced nearly in half by falling WTC 1 perimeter wall (documented fact), and it fell over in two directions, consistent with the damage, slinging debris north, south, and west of the footprint (documented fact). All structural evidence shows breaking at connections, with no sign of artificial dismemberment (documented fact).
" WTC 7 was sliced nearly in half by falling WTC 1 perimeter wall (documented fact), and it fell over in two directions, consistent with the damage, slinging debris north, south, and west of the footprint (documented fact). All structural evidence shows breaking at connections, with no sign of artificial dismemberment (documented fact). "
When watching this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EUIEA7bi4_g
I definitely don't see a single frame showing WTC7 falling in TWO directions .
Would you care to share with us from which source you get your documented facts, please. I find this interesting.
The very first clip on that link is one that got my early attention (my avatar shows the first clue, showing "straight down" is a mis-characterization). Pay attention to the east (left) corner as the collapse ensues. Notice the building moves noticably to the east prior to and during descent. That is NOT evidence of lower support being removed, but evidence of buckling down below. Also note the "kink" is not a downward kink, but the north face folding as the building split apart. Viewing collapse from all available directions do show it falling over in two directions, but be careful to not consider "falling over" the same as say, a felled tree, lower support of which is solid. Lower support in WTC 7 at the time of perimeter wall collapse (interior structure collapsed first), was not sufficient to pivot the entire upper mass, so the actual move was down and over at the same time. Confirmation is the fact debris shows the east portion of the building fell into Fiterman Hall to the north, and the west protion of the building fell across Veasey Street and into Building 6 to the south.
I've begun to lay out all the evidence here; still have a lot to post, but am taking a break for now. Be sure to study "How the Gash Got There". It is clear the damage was fatal to the building. http://wtc7fact.wordpress.com/
" Notice the building moves noticably to the east prior to and during descent. "
I don't see exactly this, even after watching the video at 0.25 and 0.5 the normal speed. Overall, I see only a rather slight assymetry in what is otherwise perfect.
As you put it " (interior structure collapsed first) " , and interestingly that's precisely where the support columns are located. You can see an upper view of the structure of WTC7 on page 20 of this document :
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTra...
That's also, of course, where one would put explosives. So, to me a possibility would simply be that the perimeter columns, not being destroyed in a controled manner , could have had "a life of their own" and could have prevented a "perfectly" symmetrical collapse. By the way, you can see that the support columns are not symetrically disposed, in the building.
An other one could be that some of the "matches" used to fire the explosives may have been damaged by fire and suffered from some malfunction. Producing the slight assymetry.
Thanks for the link .
" Notice the building moves noticably to the east prior to and during descent. "
"I don't see exactly this, even after watching the video at 0.25 and 0.5 the normal speed. Overall, I see only a rather slight assymetry in what is otherwise perfect..."
http://wtc7fact.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/wtc7gashfoldconfirmation.png
That looks more than slight assymetry.
http://wtc7fact.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/7shiftannotated.png
The left picture appears to be just after the collapse of the East Penthouse. The top row of east windows are lighter in color, indicating the roof has fallen in over the east end of the building.
"By the way, you can see that the support columns are not symetrically disposed, in the building."
In other words, the building was not constructed in the same manner as other steel framed high rise buildings.
"An other one could be that some of the "matches" used to fire the explosives may have been damaged by fire and suffered from some malfunction. Producing the slight assymetry."
The East Penthouse and roof collapsed first. Video showed floor to ceiling fire pouring out windows on the east side of the building about the 7th or 8th floor at one point during the fire.
" That looks more than slight assymetry. "
Of course not, there is precisely no more than slight assymetry in the images shown ! You are precisely using the very same images that allow architects and engineers to say that the collapse was near-symmetrical.
For the following discussion, you can seen an upper view of the structure of WTC7 on page 20 of this document : http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTra...
There is a slight assymetry, probably explained by the fact that the perimeter columns are still mostly intact at that moment, and offer some resistance. Not enough to prevent the collapse, but enough to provoke deformations like the one observed. By the way, interestingly, the deformation happens precisely on the East side, where there is far more room between support columns and perimeter columns than on the West side. So, when the support columns are destroyed, they become weights that tend to draw the building towards the ground .... and here, the East side perimeter columns having more leverage than those on the West, they can resist and bend more, provoking the slight deformation. The fact that, on the first image you see the NE corner slightly folding toward the camera, is very neatly explained by the geometry of the building: its base is a trapezoid. So that, when the support columns are destroyed, the East side perimeter columns will tend to bend perpendicularly to that side .... that means they will have the tendency to slightly bend towards the north side of the building, towards the camera.
Want to see the result of some really assymmetric collapse ? look at page 21 of the previously mentionned document.
Here, you really see what assymmetric collapse means. When such collapse happens, there is no need to resort to frame by frame video motion, looking carefully, or to draw red lines on one of the image to put in evidence some slight deformation.
Sosoome is really here to pimp his idiotic blog on Wordpress. Move along folks, nothing to see here except another zionist troll.
Sure. That's why I posted a link ONLY after being asked. I don't give a crap about "my blog". I only care about facts, and there are no facts to support controlled demolition on 9/11/01.
Why don't you and moneybots take the rest of the day off? You have zero credibilty and you're wasting your time here. You say you "only care about facts" when the truth is, only bullshit artists and trolls say things like that.
"Why don't you and moneybots take the rest of the day off? You have zero credibilty and you're wasting your time here. You say you "only care about facts" when the truth is, only bullshit artists and trolls say things like that."
Controlled demolition has zero credibility. A controlled demolition doesn't just happen. They are a major undertaking. "It looks like a demo" is not proof of anything.
"Controlled demolition has zero credibility. A controlled demolition doesn't just happen. They are a major undertaking. "It looks like a demo" is not proof of anything."
ACCORDING TO YOU THEY DO! Bwaaahahahaha I just cant help myself!
You can create facts if you control the information, what you cant control is physics and the way the Universe operates. No energy is created in dormant steel, concrete, paper or wood. THere is only stored energy that needs certain amounts of energy to release. This is usually caused by various things, fire, vibration, wind, rain et. all contain enough energy to release energy of dormant matter. Time is of the essence, rain drops contain small amounts of energy, but can release energy to dormant matter over a vast amount of time. Fire takes even less time to release energy, depending on how much fire you have and fuel, dictates the amount of energy,, multiply that over the amount of time it burns and that tells you how long and how hot you need fire to release energy in dormant matter.
There was not enough energy at the wtc to continue a perpetuation of transfer of energy, not with the current government model. AGAIN. THERE ISNT ENOUGH ENERGY PRESENT TO PERPETUATE AN INCREASINGLY ENERGY DEPENDANT EVENT.
Given probabilities, humans are lucky that a new universe wasnt born at the exact same time as the wtc event. I cannot state this enough. There just wasnt enough energy available to pulverise tens of thousands of tonnes of concrete. Furthermore, anyone who would like to explain this away, must account for the missing energy needed for conversions. In order to shatter structural steel and concrete in a uniform manner over millions of cubic feet, is no small feet. The math behind it is above me. I consider myself pretty bad at math. I could be wrong. But, I may be right.
Looks like you did allot of work on this...but....I don't buy it even for a second. They "Pulled" that building just as silverhead said they did. It streches credibility to the breaking point to buy that it collapsed like that without help.