Support Independent Journalism!
9/11 Blogger receives no foundational or corporate support. Help us cover the news and improve the site by becoming a monthly donor.
Donate via Bitcoin@
(click for our btc address)
(view transactions)
Hazardous asbestos fibers at the WTC exposed more than 110,000 people to the dangerous material; this includes 80,000 tower workers, 30,000 area residents and nearly 4,000 first responders. Asbestos exposure is directly linked to mesothelioma cancer and other asbestos-related diseases.
911blogger.com seeks to cover a broad spectrum of news, posts in the blogs section are the responsibility of the poster, readers are encouraged to check the facts and form their own conclusions.
FBI officials say terrorists may be plotting an attack on the World Trade Center building on Sept. 11, 2001.WASHINGTON—Speaking at an impromptu press conference early this morning, FBI officials revealed the discovery of new information regarding a possible terrorist attack within the United States on Sept. 11, 2001.
“We recently received intelligence from credible sources leading us to believe that, 11 years ago today, a group of Islamic extremists plan to hijack two Boeing 767 commercial airliners and fly them directly into the north and south towers of the World Trade Center in New York City,” FBI director Robert Mueller told reporters. “Furthermore, we have it on very good authority that on the same day, insurgents are also plotting to commandeer two Boeing 757 aircrafts and crash them into the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol building.”
America was founded on a conspiracy theory: that Britain’s King George and his men were conspiring against the colonists.
The Declaration of Independence recites a series of conspiracies:
When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism … The history of the present King of Great Britain [and others working with and for him] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
***
Ian Henshall for Salem-News.com
Sept 19, 2012
The most significant expert may turn out to be Judge Ferdinando Imposimato, the widely respected honorary president of the Italian Supreme Court and legendary mafia hunter who lost his brother in a revenge attack.
(LONDON) - As the annual 9/11 remembrance draws to a close, the world is as split as ever. Not only on whether the Afghan and Iraq invasions were justified, but between those who accept Washington's official 9/11 story and those who do not.
Under the mainstream media radar, the number of those who do not is steadily increasing, forming substantial majorities in places like Pakistan and Egypt and significant minorities even in NATO's heartland countries, France, the UK and the US itself. The issue is not whether, despite his denials, Osama Bin Laden might have wanted to organise the 9/11 attacks but whether Al Qaeda actually had the capability to infiltrate 19 terrorists into the US, including some very well known to the CIA, and the four highly skilled pilots necessary to pull off the spectacular coup. Up to then Al Qaeda's biggest success was setting off two truck bombs in East Africa. (1)
The stereotype promoted by the corporate media of a 9/11 sceptic, a badly educated redneck watching Fox News in a trailer park, could hardly be further from the truth. The website Patriot's Question 9/11 lists hundreds of University Professors, over a thousand architects and engineers and hundreds of aviation professionals who have spoken out against the official 9/11 story. (8)
Former Supreme Court Justice David Souter told University of New Hampshire School of Law that the “pervasive civic ignorance” in the U.S. could bring dictatorship:
I don’t worry about our losing a republican government in the United States because I’m afraid of a foreign invasion. I don’t worry about it because of a coup by the military, as has happened in some other places. What I worry about is that when problems are not addressed people will not know who is responsible, and when the problems get bad enough — as they might do for example with another serious terrorist attack, as they might do with another financial meltdown — some one person will come forward and say: ‘Give me total power and I will solve this problem.’
That is how the Roman republic fel. Augustus became emperor not because he arrested the Roman senate. He became emperor because he promised that he would solve problems that were not being solved.
Former Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O’Connor has also warned of dictatorship.
Of course, they’re not the only ones warning of fascism.
Politicians constantly urge us to never forget the victims of 9/11.
Yet the EPA lied to the heroic first responders and told them that the dust at Ground Zero was safe, when it was actually laced with a witches brew of cancer-causing chemicals which are now crippling or killing them off.
And now Congress is slashing medical care to the first responders. As Michael McAuliff notes:
Lawmakers [turned their backs on the first responders] in the budget sequester legislation Congress passed last summer to try and cut the deficit.
The sequester set up automatic budget cuts of some $1.2 trillion over 10 years, and legislators were careful to spare veterans from most of those, recognizing their sacrifices in the war on terror. But apparently no one remembered to also exempt 9/11 responders and others who first answered the call after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks that started that war.
And now the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act that President Barack Obama signed on Jan. 2, 2011, faces $38-million worth of cuts in 2013 alone if the sequester is not avoided, and could lose something approaching $300 million over the current planned life of the program.
Here is a new, five hour long video that covers the Toronto Hearings 2011 in a condensed form:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kpiVv8tQdmY
Ten years have passed since the World Trade Center attacks of September 11, 2001, and there are still many unanswered questions surrounding that fateful day.
In 2011, experts and scientists from around the world gathered in Toronto, Canada to present new and established evidence that questions the official story of 9/11. This evidence was presented to a distinguished panel of experts over a 4 day period.
Through their analysis and scientific investigations, they hope to spark a new investigation into the attacks of September 11, 2001.
Thank you for all your work!
AE911Truth’s new documentary Experts Speak Out
is poised for unprecedented success
Click to Watch It Now and Push It to #1!
 As reported in the Digital Journal, our long-awaited documentary video "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out" is finally getting some of the attention it deserves from the highbrow US television audience. As Tori Alexander notes, "PBS is the first major network to air the program," which has already rocketed in PBS rankings from #6 in views and shares last week to number #2 just yesterday. |
| Even if you have already watched ESO on DVD or as part of the 2012 World Premiere tour, watching it online at CPT12's website will reward Development Director Shari Bernson and the CPT12 board of directors for their courageous choice to bring the explosive World Trade Center evidence to their viewers yet again. |
| We need every one of you reading this message to act RIGHT NOW to take the video to #1. Together we can make this happen before the end of 9/11/2012: |
|
Solving the Mystery of WTC Building 7 - Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Top Experts Say Official Explanation Makes No Sense
Numerous structural engineers – the people who know the most about office building vulnerabilities and accidents – say that the official explanation of why building 7 at the World Trade Center collapsed on 9/11 is “impossible”, “defies common logic” and “violates the law of physics”:
By: Paul Craig Roberts September 11, 2012
The article below was written for the Journal of 9/11 Studies for the eleventh anniversary of September 11, 2001, the day that terminated accountable government and American liberty. It is posted here with the agreement of the editors.
In order to understand the improbability of the government’s explanation of 9/11, it is not necessary to know anything about what force or forces brought down the three World Trade Center buildings, what hit the Pentagon or caused the explosion, the flying skills or lack thereof of the alleged hijackers, whether the airliner crashed in Pennsylvania or was shot down, whether cell phone calls made at the altitudes could be received, or any other debated aspect of the controversy.
You only have to know two things.
One is that according to the official story, a handful of Arabs, mainly Saudi Arabians, operating independently of any government and competent intelligence service, men without James Bond and V for Vendetta capabilities, outwitted not only the CIA, FBI, and National Security Agency, but all 16 US intelligence agencies, along with all security agencies of America’s NATO allies and Israel’s Mossad. Not only did the entire intelligence forces of the Western world fail, but on the morning of the attack the entire apparatus of the National Security State simultaneously failed. Airport security failed four times in one hour. NORAD failed. Air Traffic Control failed. The US Air Force failed. The National Security Council failed. Dick Cheney failed. Absolutely nothing worked. The world’s only superpower was helpless at the humiliating mercy of a few undistinguished Arabs.
It is hard to image a more far-fetched story--except for the second thing you need to know: The humiliating failure of US National Security did not result in immediate demands from the President of the United States, from Congress, from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and from the media for an investigation of how such improbable total failure could have occurred. No one was held accountable for the greatest failure of national security in world history. Instead, the White House dragged its feet for a year resisting any investigation until the persistent demands from 9/11 families for accountability forced President George W. Bush to appoint a political commission, devoid of any experts, to hold a pretend investigation.
It has been thoroughly documented that 9/11 was entirely foreseeable … including Al Qaeda’s plans to fly planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon.
It has been extensively documented that the White House decided to invade Iraq before 9/11:
(Indeed, neoconservatives planned regime change throughout the Middle East and North Africa 20 years ago; sorry, Obama fans, the neoliberals are not very different).
Right after 9/11, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld accused Iraq of having a hand in the attacks. People may not remember now, but – at the time – the supposed Saddam-9/11 link was at least as important a justification for the Iraq war as the alleged weapons of mass destruction.
Bush and Cheney then launched a systematic program of torture in an attempt to create false evidence – through false confessions – of a link between Iraq and 9/11. The torture techniques used were Communist techniques specifically designed to produce false confessions.
By Kurt Eichenwald
Published: September 10, 2012
IT was perhaps the most famous presidential briefing in history.
On Aug. 6, 2001, President George W. Bush received a classified review of the threats posed by Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network, Al Qaeda. That morning’s “presidential daily brief” — the top-secret document prepared by America’s intelligence agencies — featured the now-infamous heading: “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.” A few weeks later, on 9/11, Al Qaeda accomplished that goal.
On April 10, 2004, the Bush White House declassified that daily brief — and only that daily brief — in response to pressure from the 9/11 Commission, which was investigating the events leading to the attack. Administration officials dismissed the document’s significance, saying that, despite the jaw-dropping headline, it was only an assessment of Al Qaeda’s history, not a warning of the impending attack. While some critics considered that claim absurd, a close reading of the brief showed that the argument had some validity.
That is, unless it was read in conjunction with the daily briefs preceding Aug. 6, the ones the Bush administration would not release. While those documents are still not public, I have read excerpts from many of them, along with other recently declassified records, and come to an inescapable conclusion: the administration’s reaction to what Mr. Bush was told in the weeks before that infamous briefing reflected significantly more negligence than has been disclosed. In other words, the Aug. 6 document, for all of the controversy it provoked, is not nearly as shocking as the briefs that came before it.
Arianna Huffington, founder of The Huffington Post, gets confronted by WeAreChange about censoring Jesse Ventura’s 9/11 article.
Retired U.S. Army General Wesley Clark gets confronted by WeAreChange about the attacks of September 11th, 2001.
Follow Luke on twitter @ http://www.twitter.com/lukewearechange
Become a member of The Sponsor Lounge and get exclusive behind the scenes content while helping us grow! Join us today! http:///www.wearechange.org/donate
Support Investigative Journalism!!
“Previously Unknown” mineral deposits in Afghanistan (Click to Enlarge)
When the United States decided to invade Afghanistan to grab Osama bin Laden—and failed, but stayed on like an unwanted guest—could it have known that the Afghans were sitting on some of the world’s greatest reserves of mineral wealth?
Ferdinando Imposimato is the honorary President of the Supreme Court of Italy, and former Senior Investigative Judge, Italy.
Imposimato presided over several terrorism-related cases, including the kidnapping and ultimate assassination of President Aldo Moro, the attempted assassination of Pope John Paul II, other political assassinations and kidnapping cases and several cases against the Mafia. He is a former Senator who served on the Anti-Mafia Commission in three administrations.
Imposimato is also a former legal consultant to the United Nations regarding institution of laws to control drug trafficking.
This week, Judge Imposimato stated publicly in writing that 9/11 was just like the “strategy of tension” carried out in Italy.
Specifically, the former Italian Prime Minister, Italian judges, and the former head of Italian counterintelligence admit that NATO, with the help of the Pentagon and CIA, carried out terror bombings in Italy and other European countries in the 1950s and blamed the communists, in order to rally people’s support for their governments in Europe in their fight against communism.
As one participant in this formerly-secret program stated: “You had to attack civilians, people, women, children, innocent people, unknown people far removed from any political game. The reason was quite simple. They were supposed to force these people, the Italian public, to turn to the state to ask for greater security” (and see this)(Italy and other European countries subject to the terror campaign had joined NATO before the bombings occurred).
And watch this BBC special:
In December, an American court entered a default judgment against Iran for allegedly having a hand in the September 11th attacks. 1
On the other hand, a 9/11 Commissioner and the Co-Chair of Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 both say in sworn declarations that the Saudi government is linked to the 9/11 attacks. 2
Then again, right after 9/11, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld accused Iraq of having a hand in the attacks.
People may not remember now, but – at the time – the supposed Saddam-9/11 link was at least as important a justification for the Iraq war as the alleged weapons of mass destruction. 3
Of course, the Afghanistan war was largely based upon the allegation that the leaders of that country – the Taliban – had harbored Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda terrorists. In other words, the U.S. government treated Afghanistan as being complicit in 9/11 by giving refuge to the 9/11 attackers. 4
At a minimum, America unintentionally created an atmosphere in which Al Qaeda terrorists could thrive. But numerous former U.S. military and intelligence officers think that rogue elements within the U.S. government intentionally allowed or facilitated the attacks.
A government official told Fox News:
Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.
Israelis were clearly spying on the 9/11 hijackers within America before 9/11. See this, this, this, this and this.
September 7, 2012 by Kevin Ryan
What changes have been made as a result of the World Trade Center (WTC) investigation conducted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)? Are tall buildings around the world safe from the risk of global collapse due to fire as described by the official explanations?
In 2008, NIST began claiming that its investigation would help ensure the safety of future buildings. NIST said that such buildings “should be increasingly resistant to fire, more easily evacuated in emergencies, and safer overall” as a result of the WTC investigation. Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, the Bush Administration cabinet member in charge of NIST at the time, said –
“The lessons learned from the tragic events of 9/11 have yielded stronger building and fire codes for a new generation of safer, more robust buildings across the nation.” [1]
Is this true? If so, we should be able to see improvements being made to the design and construction processes for tall buildings around the world. We should also expect that existing buildings would be evaluated for design problems and retrofitted in an urgent manner to ensure that fires do not bring buildings crashing down as they did on 9/11, killing thousands of unsuspecting victims.
Unfortunately, there are no signs that such design evaluations and retrofit projects have occurred. This is a strong indication that the international building community has not taken the NIST WTC reports seriously.
“False flag terrorism” is defined as a government attacking its own people, then blaming others in order to justify going to war against the people it blames. Or as Wikipedia defines it:
False flag operations are covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to appear as if they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one’s own. False flag operations are not limited to war and counter-insurgency operations, and have been used in peace-time; for example, during Italy’s strategy of tension.
The term comes from the old days of wooden ships, when one ship would hang the flag of its enemy before attacking another ship in its own navy. Because the enemy’s flag, instead of the flag of the real country of the attacking ship, was hung, it was called a “false flag” attack.
Indeed, this concept is so well-accepted that rules of engagement for naval, air and land warfare all prohibit false flag attacks.
Former U.S. Senator Tom Daschle gets confronted about how the anthrax that was sent to him originated from Fort Detrick, Md and the fact he attended the Bilderberg Conference.
http://wearechange.org/tom-daschle-confronted-on-anthrax-attack-bilderberg/
Posted by Luke Rudkowski on Sep 5, 2012
WeAreChange runs into Keith Olbermann and asks him if he has any advice for the 9/11 Truth movement.
Follow Luke on twitter @ http://www.twitter.com/lukewearechange
Become a member of The Sponsor Lounge and get exclusive behind the scenes content while helping us grow! Join us today! http:///www.wearechange.org/donate
WeAreChange asks Fox New’s Steve Doocy whether or not he supports a new 9/11 investigation.
http://wearechange.org/fox-news-steve-doocy-confronted-on-911-truth/
Front row, from left: Major Gen. Hamid Gul, director general of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI), Director of Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Willian Webster; Deputy Director for Operations Clair George; an ISI colonel; and senior CIA official, Milt Bearden at a Mujahideen training camp in North-West Frontier Province of Pakistan in 1987. (source RAWA)
Ronald Reagan meets Afghan Mujahideen Commanders at the White House in 1985 (Reagan Archives)
Preface: The director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan – Lt. General William Odom - noted:
Because the United States itself has a long record of supporting terrorists and using terrorist tactics, the slogans of today’s war on terrorism merely makes the United States look hypocritical to the rest of the world.
On this eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks, we would like to take a look back at what went wrong.
While the Bush administration tried to make its response to 9/11 its crowning achievement, the truth is that they acted with criminal incompetence and ass-covering.
(1) The U.S. is at least partly responsible for creating Al Qaeda. For example, Jimmy Carter’s National Security Adviser admitted on CNN that we organized and supported Bin Laden and the other originators of “Al Qaeda” in the 1970s to fight the Soviets.
Professor of strategy at the Naval War College and former National Security Agency intelligence analyst and counterintelligence officer John R. Schindler documents, the U.S. supported Bin Laden and other Al Qaeda terrorists in Bosnia.
(2) The chair of the 9/11 Commission said that the attack was preventable. It is thoroughly-documented that an attack such as 9/11 was entirely foreseeable. Specifically, Al Qaeda flying planes into the World Trade Center and Pentagon was something which American military and intelligence services – and our allies – knew could happen.
(3) U.S. intelligence services have repeatedly infiltrated Al Qaeda and related groups, but then idiotically failed to stop them. For example – as the New York Times, CBS News and others reported – the FBI informant involved in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center begged the FBI to substitute fake bomb power for real explosives, but his FBI handler moronically let real explosives be used.
Similarly – as reported by Newsweek, the New York Times and others – an FBI informant hosted and rented a room to 2 of the 9/11 hijackers while they were in the U.S., but then stupidly failed to stop them.
http://www.wnyc.org/blowthewhistle/
On December 22nd, in the face of seemingly unanimous bipartisan support, the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act (Bill S.372) was killed in the final moments of the last legislative session when a mystery Senator placed what’s called a secret hold on the bill. This bill had already been passed by the House and the Senate, but in the final vote on the reconciled bill, it died and no one had to take responsibility.
Why do we care? Because Bill S. 372 is designed to protect government workers from being punished (as they usually are) for exposing illegality, waste and corruption. It was wildly popular - in public. But a legislator (or legislators) were able to kill it, by using an undemocratic device to hide from their constituents.
On January 7th, On the Media, in conjunction with the Government Accountability Project, launched the Blow the Whistle project, and asked our listeners to call their Senators and ask them if they were responsible for the secret hold which killed this important legislation.
8/16/2012
by Rena Patty
A highlight of our time in Whitefish was a radio interview set up by Pam that included Neils Harrit in Copenhagen, Richard Gage in California, Pam and myself in Whitefish, MT, hosted by Josef Hanji on a local Copenhagen radio station.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GixmSj-ryjk
Another highlight was opportunity to meet with an architect who lives in Whitefish, Richard Smith, and discuss current events. Several of us watched the Experts Speak Out documentary together.
We can do radio interviews from the road by cell phone. You can help. Let your local radio station know about the unique opportunity to interview us from the road as we ride across the country to raise awareness for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. We'll invite one of the experts from Experts Speak Out to join the interview.
August 11, 2012
By Kevin Ryan
The Wall Street Journal recently commented on the upcoming military trial of Khalid Sheik Mohammed (KSM). The article claimed that KSM and four other terrorists were somehow making a mockery of the U.S. justice system by trying to “use the open military trial to promote jihad and discredit American institutions, including the military system of justice.”[1] Unsuspecting readers might think that an “open military trial” would actually be less reflective of American institutions than the (actually open) civil trial requested for KSM by many of the 9/11 victims’ families. But the more important question is – are the right terrorists being brought to trial?
That question is not welcome in polite conversation.
For example, last August I was invited to appear on National Public Radio (NPR) to discuss the lasting phenomenon of 9/11 skepticism. The show’s regular host was replaced by a woman who had clearly made up her mind about the subject. Ironically, throughout the show she made snide comments about “conspiracy theorists” when referring to the millions of people who don’t believe the official conspiracy theory. Her other guests, from the Hearst Corporation and Canada’s National Post, joined her in using some variation of this phrase every thirty seconds during the hour long show. As the sole representative of 9/11 skeptics, I was allowed five minutes to speak until it was clear the conversation was not going as intended.[2]
Posted: Aug 08, 2012 8:31 PM CDT
By Ben Swann - bio | email: bswann@fox19.com
Direct Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcZKso_Z6M8
http://www.fox19.com/story/19232163/reality-check-the-us-government-actu...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WXIX-TV
In George Orwell’s novel 1984, the country of Oceania has been in a war against Eurasia for years.
Oceania suddenly switches sides, naming Eastasia as its enemy and making its mortal enemy, Eurasia, its new ally.
The government uses propaganda to convince people that, “We’ve always been at war with Eastasia”. The dumbed-down public doesn’t even notice that they’ve switches sides, and blindly rallies around Eurasia as its perennial friend and ally.
The same thing is happening in real life with Al Qaeda.
Western governments and mainstream media have admitted that Al Qaeda is fighting against the secular Syrian government, and that the West is supporting the Syrian opposition … which is helping Al Qaeda.
Similarly, the opposition which overthrew Libya’s Gadaffi was mainly Al Qaeda … and they now appear to be in control of Libya (and are instrumental in fighting in Syria.)
The U.S. also funds terrorist groups within Iran.
Of course, Al Qaeda was blamed for 9/11, and the entire decades-long “War on Terror” was premised on rooting out Al Qaeda and related groups.
So the fact that we now consider Al Qaeda fighters to be allies in any way, shape or form is positively Orwellian.
By Russ Baker on Jul 31, 2012
Full Story: http://whowhatwhy.com/2012/07/31/only-lone-wolves-commit-terror/
History has shown us, however, that acts of violence, with or without declared sponsorship, are not the exclusive province of crazy loners or renegade regimes. In fact, we know from experience that, as horrendous as it sounds, those in power have sometimes terrorized their own populace while blaming the violence on others. The reasons for this vary widely, but include justifying retributive acts abroad or domestic repression.
One classic technique of creating disorder to justify subsequent repression or military action is the “false flag” attack, so named to describe a ship’s flying an enemy flag while attacking one of its own country’s vessels. The cases in which such attacks were intended to become the basis for a severe reaction could fill a book. Here are a few:
— to share the video with your family, friends, and professional colleagues.