Presumption of a Cover-Up …

Judges and lawyers know that – if someone intentionally destroys evidence – he’s probably trying to hide his crime.  American law has long recognized that destruction of evidence raises a presumption of guilt for  the person who destroyed the evidence.

So what does it mean when the US government intentionally destroyed massive amounts of evidence related to 9/11?

Judge and Prosecutor Destroy Evidence

For example, it was revealed last week that the judge overseeing the trial of surviving 9/11 suspects conspired with the prosecution to destroy evidence relevant to a key suspect’s defense. And see this.

(The Defense Department has also farmed out most of the work of both prosecuting and defending the surviving 9/11 suspects to the same private company.  And the heads of the military tribunal prosecuting the 9/11 suspects said that the trials must be rigged so that there are no acquittals.)

Destruction of Videotapes

The CIA videotaped the interrogation of 9/11 suspects, falsely told the 9/11 Commission that there were no videotapes or other records of the interrogations, and then illegally destroyed all of the tapes and transcripts of the interrogations.

9/11 Commission co-chairs Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton wrote:

Those who knew about those videotapes — and did not tell us about them — obstructed our investigation.

The strongest evidence linking the alleged hijackers to 9/11 was a video said to be from the closed circuit TV (CCTV) system at Dulles International Airport in Washington DC. The video was not made available until the day before the 9/11 Commission Report was released, in 2004, and it helped to pave the way for widespread acceptance of the official account. Since the other evidence against the accused hijackers was dubious and suspiciously convenient for the FBI, which provided it, the Dulles video should be examined closely.

Doing so has led some independent 9/11 investigators to conclude that the Dulles video contains “no information to link its images to AA 77.” Reasons include that:

1. None of the Dulles airport staff remembered seeing the alleged hijackers at the airport
2. Dulles had over 300 cameras but no footage was released except for portions of this one video (and no video was available from the other airports)
3. The alleged Dulles video contains no date, time stamp, or camera identification
4. The video was shot at a rate of 30 frames per second (fps), which the investigators said is not typical of CCTV videos
5. The video appears to be an edited composite of shots taken from different angles

Additionally, it has been noticed that the airport screeners in the Dulles video did not perform their duties according to airport requirements. An attorney representing 9/11 victims’ families stated that security agents in the video screened the suspects in ways that were not like those required in Dulles training videos.

Could the video be fraudulent?

Former 9/11 commission member calls for release of 28 pages in report
CNN - Nicole Gaouette Tue May 24, 2016
http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/24/politics/classified-28-pages-saudi-us-attacks-terrorism/

Washington (CNN) — A former member of the 9/11 Commission called Tuesday for the public release of 28 classified pages pertaining to the attacks.

"I am strongly in favor of declassifying this information as quickly as possible," Tim Roemer told a House committee. "The 9/11 families deserve it, the American people deserve it, and justice deserves it. We have the right to transparency and sunlight -- not the darkness."

The hearing, titled "The U.S.-Saudi Arabia Counterterrorism Relationship," comes amid increasing scrutiny in Washington about Saudi Arabia's possible role in the terror attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, and a push in Congress to allow victims of terrorism to sue foreign governments linked to terror attacks on U.S. soil.

That has fueled calls for the release of 28 classified pages on the report into the attacks. The pages indicate that a network of Saudis, some in official positions, supported al Qaeda operatives in the run up to the attacks, according to some of those who have seen the documents and are pushing for their release, including former Navy Secretary John Lehman and former Senator Bob Graham.

At Tuesday's hearing, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle criticized the Saudi Arabian government for funding the spread of Wahabi Islam, a fundamentalist interpretation of the ancient religion that "teaches that apostates should be persecuted and in some cases killed," said Texas Rep. Ted Poe, the Republican chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on terrorism.

Poe noted that some analysts say that followers of Wahabi Islam might be more disposed to feel sympathetic to terrorist groups. And he echoed Roemer's call.

The National Archives released a series of memos written by Sept. 11 Commission staff members, a compilation of numerous possible connections between the hijackers and Saudis inside the United States. The document appears to be a glimpse into what is still contained in the classified 28 pages of the congressional inquiry into the 2001 attacks.

http://nyti.ms/22lcHED